Spiffor: I think we're in agreement on this mostly. Chirac only has a small amount of time to reverse course--about two weeks by my reckoning. And he may have already done too much.
The fact is that the US can't really do anything to hurt France, so there's no downside to this for Chirac.
Frogger: Not directly, no. However, more than any other permanent member, the bulk of France's power is invested in the Security Council. If Bush goes to war without the backing of the Security Council, then the relevance of the Security Council is diminished. This would ultimately hurt France's power. There would be a cost to Bush, of course.
The fact is that the US can't really do anything to hurt France, so there's no downside to this for Chirac.
Frogger: Not directly, no. However, more than any other permanent member, the bulk of France's power is invested in the Security Council. If Bush goes to war without the backing of the Security Council, then the relevance of the Security Council is diminished. This would ultimately hurt France's power. There would be a cost to Bush, of course.
Comment