Council of Weasels, Chapter II
: Some very illuminating things coming out of the Council of Weasels meeting in Russia — all the more illuminating because this comes from the official Russian news agency (though badly translated, it still represents their spin).
First, Jacques Chirac is calling for nothing less than a world government, seated at the U.N. In other words, he is pushing for the EUing of the world. Just as the EU sets all kinds of laws for its member states and stands superior, so does Chirac want the U.N. to be the body to decree on war and on justice.
In his words, foreign policy based on democratic values should lay on collective norms. To this end, the French president stressed the need to create an international justice system. No international order cannot lay on the logic of violence, he said.
Let’s note that “logic” is the French word of the year. Chirac’s diplomats kept arguing against what they called the “logic of war.” Their boss does it, too:
Chirac said it is symbolic that this meeting includes the leaders of Russia, Germany and France because “our countries are situated on the continent that after totalitarian regimes, the two world conflicts, the holocaust and the 50-year Cold-War has decided to put an end to the logics of force. Peace was restored in Europe and it succeeded in curing its wounds”.
In his words, only joints actions within the U.N. framework should determine the balance between diplomatic methods and the use of force. “In this world the force can be used only by the consent of the whole international community. Thus we will return to the fundamentals reflected in the Charter of the United Nations Organisation,” Chirac said.
First, the “logic of force” is, indeed logical; the logic of force could have averted war in Iraq, if you had not derailed it, Jacques. Saddam understood the logic of force; only when faced with force did he act as the U.N. decreed; but when he saw that you, Jacques, were cutting that force off at the knees he refused to cooperate. Perhaps he could have been forced into compliance with the threat of force instead of actual force but you stopped that. Tres illogique.
Further, your “logic” doesn’t hold up from your own backyard. What, you would have wanted some world body to vote before defending you against Hitler? You would have allowed the U.N. to block any show of force against the expansion of Soviet force? You want the U.N. to approve any nation defending itself? (Mind you, I’m not some right-wing U.N. paranoid; I believe in supporting the potential of the U.N. as a means of finding peaceful paths; but giving the U.N. the power to rule the world? Now that’s frightening.)
Chirac is either an idiot or he’s the most meglomaniacal ruler of all, with ambitions to take over the world through the U.N. Hmmm. I vote for the first.
