Here and There, Mar. 6

French Ambassador to Israel Jacques Huntzinger penned the following op-ed for Ha'aretz, titled "The French Position on Iraq" (please hold your applause)

France is not a friend of the Iraqi regime and it is not motivated by commercial considerations: In 2001, commerce with Iraq accounted for only 0.20 percent of French exports and 0.30 percent of imports.

The latter means that France's 2001 import/export business with Iraq was still worth more than $1.5 billion, and that ignores the value of expected future business. Oh, and by the way, guess who is Iraq's #1 foreign vendor, accounting for 22.5% of all goods imported by Iraq? [hint the name of that country's President rhymes with Irac ]. (It also turns out that the US is Iraq's biggest export market. oops. but at least we're taking responsibility for the problem)

What does France want now, along with Germany, Russia, China and - let us be clear about it - a majority of the countries of the world?

Sorry, Jacques, you're talking to an audience that has already figured out that the "majority of the countries of the world" will sign up for almost any idiotic position supported by Arabian despots.

The San Francisco Chronicle is troubled by the United States acting unilaterally to defend our national security interests. On the other hand, the Chronicle can be counted on to boldly sit down and campaign for unilateral surrender in order to appease demented tyrants

an international partnership for dealing with North Korea has failed to emerge. China and Russia declined to take part... The United States must act on its own to head off conflict that would endanger South Korea and the 37,000 American troops on the half-century-old truce line within easy range of North Korean artillery.

What kind of action does the Chronicle recommend?

Bush should stop hinting at a military strike, and start talks to head off serious trouble on the Korean Peninsula.

What kind of "talks" does the Chronicle have in mind? What would they have us offer the North Koreans? What are we to ask for in return? What reassurance do we have that they will keep their side of the bargain? What action would we take in the (certain) event that they break their side of the deal and make more threats? The Chronicle doesn't say. All I know is that if I were to make a career change into the extortion business, my first call would be on the gullible wusses over at the San Francisco Chronicle.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at March 06, 2003 07:51 AM