Lou Dobbs: "US should review Europe, UN Ties"

[RonOnGuitar]

Economist, financial commentator and host of Public Broadcasting's "Moneyline", Lou Dobbs considers post-war Iraq ties.



By Lou Dobbs

Saddam's business partners



It is well past time that the United States seriously reviewed its economic and political relationships not only with France and Germany but with the United Nations itself. Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schroder are notorious emblems of the old Europe and have done incalculable damage not only to their respective relationships with the United States but also to an institution--the United Nations--that can hardly afford further assault.



Chirac, who seeks the limelight on even the most trivial of occasions, has once again miscalculated and attracted the glare of American consumers. "There is no risk that the United States and France, or the American and French people, will quarrel or get angry with each other," said Chirac, whose place in history is assured by his gargantuan geopolitical misjudgments.



American public sup-port for President Bush and the war against Saddam Hussein continues to grow--and, with it, public outrage against France for its irresponsible opposition to coalition efforts to liberate Iraq.



Chirac seems to be on some sort of self-appointed crusade to resurrect his relevance--and that of the government he purports to lead. But his recklessness could have severe geopolitical and economic repercussions.



France's economy is growing at its slowest rate in six years, and its unemployment rate now approaches 10 percent, hardly the picture of economic health. The French sell us almost $10 billion more in products than they buy from us, and that $10 billion is now threatened by American consumers who are fed up with France's callow opposition to U.S. policy and its de facto embrace of Hussein's regime of terror and oppression.



Down the drain? There are already signs that France may be feeling the pressure. French-wine sales in the United States have slowed. Distributors on the East and West coasts report that sales are down roughly 8 percent in the past month. And last week, the French Tourism Ministry said tourist bookings have fallen 15 percent to 25 percent since the start of the war in Iraq. The number of American tourists in France fell 18 percent last year--a trend that French officials said has continued this year.



Earlier this month, the state of Montana's pension funds sold off $15 million in French holdings because of concern about the country's dealings in Iraq and a backlash against French companies. "We couldn't figure out why France would be so adamant in keeping a murderous dictator in office," Montana Board of Investments member Jay Klawon told the Associated Press. "The only thing we could surmise is perhaps French companies have been doing business with Iraq against U.N. sanctions."



The business ties between France and Iraq have indeed been con-siderable and complex. France has exported $3.5 billion in goods to Iraq since sanctions were eased in 1996, according to a September 2002 report commissioned by the French Parliament. And in 2001, French exports to Iraq reached $650 million--more than any other country.



But France hasn't been the only one benefiting from Baghdad. So has the U.N. itself, through its oil-for-food program. The effect of the program has been to put tens of millions of dollars in the hands of Hussein over the past several years. Hussein has decided what to do with that money, and the U.N. has been his biggest accomplice. As Claudia Rosett of the Wall Street Journal has said, the U.N. has "become a business partner, effectively, with the Iraqi regime."



The U.N.'s oil-for-food program now supports a massive bureaucracy of 4,000 workers and is sitting on an $8 billion escrow account from the sale of Iraqi oil. Only after President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair publicly chastised the U.N. did it begin the process of freeing up that money so it can be used for the people who deserve it, and own it: the people of Iraq. U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, Chirac, Schroder, and Russia's Vladimir Putin had worked to use the money intended for the Iraqi people as a lever against U.S. and British policy in Iraq.



The president's call for resumption of the oil-for-food program for humanitarian reasons is entirely appropriate. It's a mistake to continue the program beyond two to three months while permitting the U.N. to fly the blue and white flag over the Iraqi humanitarian relief effort. The red, white, and blue of the United States and Britain should fly over that effort to rid the region of the false impression that our flags are only battle standards and that the U.N. flag is the future.



www.usnews.com/usnews/iss...7dobbs.htm

[LarreeMP3]

"The only thing we could surmise is perhaps French companies have been doing business with Iraq against U.N. sanctions."



I think it's rather obvious.

Edited by: LarreeMP3 at: 4/6/03 8:25:02 am

[AQUARIAN AGE]

Would you please give them their "Statue of Liberty" back?!

[Galmin]

Quote:

---

Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schroder are notorious emblems of the old Europe and have done incalculable damage not only to their respective relationships with the United States but also to an institution--the United Nations--that can hardly afford further assault.

---

Pure bunk. It was neither Mr Chirac nor Mr Schröder who put the UN into the perilous position it has been in.



Ron, I'm waiting for your take on International Law.



Anytime you're ready.

[Galmin]

Quote:

---

The business ties between France and Iraq have indeed been con-siderable and complex. France has exported $3.5 billion in goods to Iraq since sanctions were eased in 1996, according to a September 2002 report commissioned by the French Parliament. And in 2001, French exports to Iraq reached $650 million--more than any other country.



But France hasn't been the only one benefiting from Baghdad.

---

That is correct:



Iraq's principal export destinations, 2001:

1, United States 60.6% (Doubled end of 2002!!)

2, France 8.5%

3, Netherlands 7.4%

4, Italy 5.8%

5, Canada 5.5%





Iraq's principal import sources, 2001:

1, France 19.4%

2, Australia 14.4%

3, Italy 10.7%

4, Germany 9.9%

5, China 6.4%



This is all within the oil for food program, in other words: peanuts.



Btw, anyone sitting in a country whos government in less than three years created a trading deficit of 500 billion, a national budget deficit more than half of that and a dept soaring above a thousand billion dollars shouldn't point economy-fingers

[bbchris]

Galmin - very very interesting - can you point me to the source of the export statistics please? Thank you!

|Blah Blah|Talk Soup|Thinking Out Loud|thewireweb|

[Galmin]

Sure.



I picked it up at the Australian government (department of foreign affairs and trade) this morning. They have nothin' to hide :D



PDF



HTML

[MIKE BURN]

Good source and facts-finding

[MIKE BURN]

Reading the statistics... the following, by Richard Perle, 'shines' in a new light of propaganda-lies:

Quote:

---

Germany and France



Perle: "I think it's important to distinguish between German policy and French policy….



"In the German case, there is strong evidence that the Chancellor, in his bid for reelection, tried hard to improve his standing in a group within the German electorate where he was falling below the anticipated numbers. The group, as I understand it, was women in the 25 to 40 age category. The Germans, like us, now conduct their elections with extensive polling. That's the antithesis of leadership and I'm sorry to say we all do it…. So they hit on appealing to the antiwar sentiment, the pacifist sentiment if you will, that was present in that group in the population and more broadly to be fair and there was a little surge in the polls and it was repeated and there was a further surge in the polls and it became the chancellor's policy to elicit the strongest possible constituency among people who were alarmed at the prospect of war, frightened at the prospect of war, opposed to military action to deal with Saddam Hussein, and he painted himself into a corner, a corner so extreme that it became the chancellor's policy that Germany would not participate in a military action against Saddam Hussein even if the United Nations mandated such a doctrine. It was precisely the sort of unilateralism of which the United States is frequently accused: separating himself completely from any possible international consensus.



"Now, the French motivations, I think, are different. Let's be candid about it. France has found a way of dealing with Saddam Hussein that simply wouldn't work for the United States because it entails a degree of cooperation that is not acceptable for us. The commercial relationship between France and Saddam's regime is on hold owing to the sanctions but I think it's clear that the moment the sanctions are removed there is a pipeline of contracts that would be promulgated and they're important for France. We shouldn't kid ourselves, they're important for France. It's my understanding that the Total contract with Saddam is worth $40 billion to $60 billion…. So there are commercial interests and for those people who accuse the United States in being interested in oil in this matter, I submit to you that our interest in oil is in purchasing it on the world market. That could best be accomplished by lifting the sanctions, hardly by going to war against Saddam Hussein. The French interest in the promulgation of contracts that will only go forward with this regime is perfectly obvious.



"But there's a second French attitude that I think we have to come to grips with and understand and that is the desire on the part of France to build the European Union as a counterweight to the United States. Counterweight is the term most frequently employed by the French, by Chris Patten in Brussels and by others. For a long time the United States and France have been allies. Good allies. Vital to each other's security at many times in our history and never in the period in which we were allies who supported one another did either of us think of describing the other as a counterweight. A relationship that can be described by the term counterweight is not a relationship of alliance."

---

Source: PNAC, U.S. "Think Tank"

[bbchris]

Thanks Galmin! Those facts are very interesting.

|Blah Blah|Talk Soup|Thinking Out Loud|thewireweb|

[LarreeMP3]

We wanna know about the stuff that goes on under the table.

[Galmin]

[Bullshitburger of the month...]

Quote:

---

. France has found a way of dealing with Saddam Hussein that simply wouldn't work for the United States because it entails a degree of cooperation that is not acceptable for us.

---

Iraq's principal export destinations, 2001:

1, United States 60.6% (Doubled end of 2002!!)

Quote:

---

We wanna know about the stuff that goes on under the table.

---

Yeah, me too. Show us the evidence in the form of fotoshopped pics, dubious telephonetaps and 10 year old student homework. That will suffice.



Even Perle says there is nothing going on under the table:

Quote:

---

The commercial relationship between France and Saddam's regime is on hold owing to the sanctions

---

Edited by: Galmin  at: 4/7/03 8:02:13 pm