Swimming against the Tide

Will Nicolas Sarkozy ditch the French mission in Afghanistan to save his own presidency?

BY ERIC PAPE | JANUARY 26, 2012

PARIS – In the United States, sadly, the death of four soldiers in Afghanistan is the sort of routine event that barely makes the evening news. In France, on the other hand, which has seen far fewer casualties in over 11 years of fighting, the killing of four French military trainers and the wounding of 15 more by an Afghan recruit on Friday, Jan. 20, is not only a tragedy, it is forcing leaders to reevaluate the entire mission. One doesn’t have to be unduly cynical to think that the impending presidential election is something of a factor.

"The French army is in Afghanistan to serve the Afghan people, against terrorism and against the Taliban," a somber and visibly fatigued President Nicolas Sarkozy told diplomats in Paris after morning arrived with the bad news. "The French army isn't in Afghanistan so that Afghan soldiers fire at them."

While several top French officials initially suggested that a 21-year-old recruit, Abdul Mansour, was a Taliban fighter who had infiltrated Afghan army ranks, other indications suggest that he was a lone wolf or that he -- like millions of Afghans -- suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder. A French security source told the conservative daily Le Figaro that Mansour, who was captured after the attack, asserted he had become enraged over the video of U.S. Marines urinating on Afghan corpses.

What is certain is that the four flag-draped coffins that arrived in France in the pre-dawn hours of Jan. 23 brought the French death toll in Afghanistan to 82 since 2001. Eleven years into a fight without a clear victory, the attack spurred Sarkozy to freeze France's training of Afghan soldiers and publicly mull withdrawing French troops on a sped-up timeline.

So, will Sarkozy's France "go wobbly," as Margaret Thatcher used to say, in Afghanistan? The president set the stage for a wobble when he suggested that France requires substantive assurances that Afghan authorities will properly vet recruits to avoid putting French trainers at unnecessary risk. Sarkozy promised to seek clarification during a meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai in Paris slated for Jan 27. If he isn't convinced, Sarkozy suggested, France is gone.

But there are reasons to doubt Sarkozy's seriousness. If this attack, in a remote Afghan province, really shook the Elysée as much as the president suggested, should Washington be worried about the possibility of losing 3,600 French military personnel on the ground in Afghanistan in short order? U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sounded remarkably unconcerned about that possibility after she expressed her condolences on Jan. 20. "I am in great sympathy with what happened to the French soldiers. It was terrible and I can certainly appreciate the strong feelings that are being expressed," Clinton said at a press conference with German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle. "We are in close contact with our French colleagues and we have no reason to believe that France will do anything other than continue to be part of the very carefully considered transition process."

PHILIPPE WOJAZER/AFP/Getty Images

 SUBJECTS:
 

Eric Pape is a writer living in Paris.

Facebook|Twitter|Reddit

T JAY

6:29 PM ET

January 26, 2012

Very Bad! Whatever is Happening in The World

I really feel sorry when i hear any human dies any where in the world, don't know why we are killing our own race!
Please visit this link if you would like to know about Erectile Dysfunction Cure then Click On:- Erectile Dysfunction Cure

  REPLY
 

FRENCHCONNECTION

8:54 PM ET

January 26, 2012

sterile speculation

1) France agrees to two decades of support in Afghanistan, despite attack on its troops

French troops will continue to train their Afghan counterparts well beyond 2014, when combat operations are due to conclude, according to the agreement described by Afghan and French officials.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/war-zones/france-agrees-to-two-decades-of-support-in-afghanistan-despite-attack-on-its-troops/2012/01/26/gIQAtd3tSQ_story.html

2) an early withdrawal wouldn't have "saved" any presidency. The pro-withdrawal (socialists) won't vote for him anyway and he was more likely to LOSE votes from the right in a such a case.

3) all experts agreed that a withdrawal from all French troops would take a year anyway, taking it very close to the 2014 deadline

4) in case of a socialist victory, the new President would have to breach the treaty with Karzai and draw a lot of criticism. At most they could "speed up" what's already planned but it wouldn't change very much.

5) what we saw was a typical Sarkozian overreaction which was basically backpedaled the same day.

6) read French press before writing articles about France

  REPLY
 

AARKY

6:26 PM ET

January 27, 2012

French Out of Afghanistan??

The Afghan stance won't kill Sarkozy in an election. He is already detested enough to lose any election. The two words that were not mentioned in this article and which will certainly help get him defeated is his rabid flag waving for an attack against Iran on behalf of his Israeli handlers. If he isn't a Zionist zealot, then why has he been pushing all the santions against Iran and also rattling the saber. So long Sarkozy, don't let the door hit you on the way out.

  REPLY
 

KUNINO

3:03 AM ET

January 28, 2012

I suppose it's good Pape rushed into print ...

... but his lengthy reasoning seems already to have been overtaken by a joint statement from Sarkozy and Karzai that they want NATO out some time next year, rather than in 2014, which NATO has nominated.

  REPLY