H.E Jean Loup Kuhn-Delforge has been France's ambassador to Bulgaria since September 2001. He has substantial diplomatic experience. Before coming to Bulgaria, he was director in The French Abroad service ("Consular Affaires" directorate.)
H.E Jean Loup Kuhn-Delforge answered questions of Martina Iovcheva
Q: The United States and the United Kingdom have begun a final diplomatic push to win enough votes to pass a Security Council resolution on the use of force against Iraq. Does France see the need of a second resolution on Iraq ?
A: No, we don't need, at this stage, a second resolution. It is neither necessary nor useful. Resolution 1441, voted unanimously, gives enough basis to disarm Iraq. We are still in the time for inspections : they have just reached their full pace. Nevertheless they have already produced significant results. We cannot base our decision solely on suspicions : no evidence has been given that Iraq still possesses weapons of mass destruction or capabilities in this field. We have no elements allowing us to conclude to a failure of the inspections. On the contrary, we have all reasons to pursue, to encourage, to reinforce concretely the work of the inspectors on the ground.
To step up our efforts to give a real chance to a peaceful settlement of the crisis, while preserving the unity of the security council, we have first to explore fully all the possibilities presented in resolution 1441, according to a realistic and rigourous timeline.
We cannot accept a second resolution which would be clearly in the logic of the use of force. So far the conditions for using force against Iraq are not fulfilled : a resolution whose only purpose would be to "put a stamp" on a decision already taken is not acceptable for the credibility and authority of the Security Council. Such a war would have incalculable consequences for the fragile Middle East (specially at a time when the Israeli-Palestinian crisis is blocked and does not receive the attention it deserves). It would increase tensions and risk paving the way to others conflicts, and compromise our fight against terrorism which requires the unity of the whole international community. Beyond Iraq, it is the way we want to manage the world and to manage the regional and proliferation crises which is at stake. It is why the use of force should remain the last option.
A very big majority of the international community, countries as well as public opinions, including UN Council of Security members, agree with this position of good sense : don't do the last step before the first one !
Q: Will France veto a resolution that green lights military operation in Iraq ?
A: For the reasons above, France will oppose to such an approach within the framework of the discussions in the Security Council. We refuse any implicit or explicit process leading automatically to war. France will face up to its responsabilities.
Q: What is the solution in case that the UN inspectors say that they cannot carry out their work in Iraq ?
A: Then we would be in a second phase. In case Iraq would not answer the requirements of the inspectors, if the inspectors consider they are not able anymore to pursue their mission, it is for them to report the Security Council. The Council would then convene to consider the conclusions to be drawn. Our position would depend on the report of the inspectors. France has said all along : we do not exclude the possibility that force may have to be used one day.
Q: What could change France's position on Iraq ?
A: France's position has not changed since the begining of the crisis. It is a two-steps approach: Iraq must be disarmed peacefully according to the relevant resolutions of the Security Council. Inspections must go on as long as they give results. Of course, Baghdad must collaborate. We must increase pressure on Iraq and meanwhile use all the possibilities of resolution 1441. But France has always said that it doesn't exclude any option, if the inspectors conclude that it is impossible for them to fulfill their mission.
Q: How would you comment the criticism of French president Chirac to the East European countries for their pro-American stance ?
A: First, we have no difference whatsoever with the US over the goal of eliminating Iraq programme of weapons of mass destructions. The USA and France have a long standing friendship and the French people knows the price of this friendship and solidarity. The problem is not any "pro-american stance".
President Chirac's statement was not primarily a statement concerning the Iraqi crisis. It was much more the expression of a concern about Europe. While candidate countries are joining the European family, we regret that some positions on Iraq have been expressed without any consultation with the EU Presidency and with the members states , who had adopted a common position on January 27th. Beyond that, some positions and initiatives have injured the ambition of a Europe independant, united, with its own identity. President Chirac wished only to recall the necessary spirit of solidarity, that must prevail among EU countries.
After all, what President Chirac said was not much different from Mr Robertson's statement last week about NATO at the bulgarian National Assembly : « With privileges come responsabilities. New members must play a constructive role, helping the Alliance to arrive at consensus. »
Q: President Chirac was particularly critical to Bulgaria and Romania. Is his statement in Brussels a signal that France has changed its position regarding Bulgaria's EU accession in 2007 ?
A: The accession of Bulgaria to the EU remains our common political objective, which cannot be questionned. The EU elargement to Bulgaria is irreversible. During the last years, France, and President Chirac personnally, have backed the current enlargement, specially to Bulgaria and Romania. Minister Kouneva* told recently in an interview for « Sega » that one has not to forget that France was one of the countries having supported the most strongly Bulgaria to get the date of 2007 for its accession. In view of this continuous french position, president's Chirac was in no way an opinion on the nations themselves. Nor on their future in Europe.
Q: Do you think that Bulgaria's pro-U.S. stance on Iraq could influence the country's chances to become EU member ? Will Bulgaria's Iraqi stance have negative influence on the country's relations with France ?
A: It has not any negative influence on Bulgaria's relations with France. Three recent examples : last week, the French Ministry of Interior, Nicolas Sarkozy, paid a visit to Sofia about the fruitful cooperation between the two polices. Your Minister of Agriculture is in France where he meets with his french counterpart about our cooperation in the field of agriculture. And the bulgarian Deputy minister of transport discusses in Paris with French Secretary of State for Transport and Sea the negotiations on the transport policy chapter of the EU accession process. This shows the density of our bilateral cooperation.
Q: Do you think Bulgaria's position on Iraq could have a bad impact on its image in Europe ?
A: President Chirac only wished to call the attention of applicant countries leaders on the necessity of taking account of European public opinions. And you have seen what these opinions think about a hasty, illegitimate, preventive war against Iraq. The enlargement process is very delicate. The opinion is sensitive on this topic and things and should not be complicated.
*Bulgaria's Minister of European Affairs
Send to Kindle
