Comment du Jour

Franco/Russian Deal on Disputed Mistral Ships

St. Nazaire, FRANCE—As the high-speed TGV train from Paris slowed down coming into St. Nazaire passing the sprawling shipyard alongside, a little boy in in the seat in front of us became animated and exclaimed,”Look, Mama, there are the big warships!”  The child was pointing to the two massive grey-hulled Mistral helicopter carriers which had been built in France for the Russian Navy, but because of the ongoing Ukraine crisis,  were still marooned in political limbo and at dockside. 

But back in Paris, amidst the summer heat and suspended political theatrics during the August holidays, French and Russian negotiators had reached a deal on the ships’ fate. They would not be joining Vladimir Putin’s fleet as planned because of the continuing political sanctions over Ukraine.  Rather the French government announced compensation for canceling the delivery of the vessels which were paid for and specially fitted for the Russians.  Moscow would be “fully reimbursed” the presidential office stated in Paris; Russia, added “Moscow considers the Mistral issue completely resolved.” 

The two Mistral-type helicopter carriers would stay in France, at least for now. 

Many months of quiet but often acrimonious negotiations, between Francois Hollande’s socialist government and the Kremlin have reached an accord whereby the French government will reimburse the Russians $1.3 billion for the ships. The French will then subsequently keep or resell the Mistral carriers.  Crisis solved…sort of.  

The newspaper Le Figaro headlined, “Mistral: the real cost of compromise with Russia.”

The Vladivostok, which was finished and supposed to sail to Russia last fall, and the Sevastopol, were built at the huge STX shipyards in St. Nazaire.  The deal going back to 2010, brought extra business to the shipyards and needed jobs in a region still dependent on the maritime industry.

Just last Summer this column reported, the port was hosting over 400 Russian sailors who were training on the vessels and preparing to sail them back to their disputed Black Sea bases in Crimea. 

In the past, these very same St. Nazaire shipyards constructed the most famous of French ocean liners such as the Normandie in the 1930’s and the France in 1962. In recent years Cunard’s Queen Mary 2 was built here as well as a dozen major American cruise ships.  

St. Nazaire has a darker side too; during WWII the port just alongside the shipyard housed 

a Nazi submarine base from where U-boats sailed from the Bay of Biscay deep into the Atlantic. The grey concrete bunker submarine pens which remain to this day stand as an eerie reminder of the port’s past and its connections to history. 

So where do the ships go now?   Short term most likely to the northern naval base at Brest. 

Naturally while such modern and militarily versatile naval vessels are in demand there are a few serious questions to be asked. Will France sell them only to NATO countries?  Or other allies?  Most navies could not even operate such vessels nor integrate them into combined naval operations.  Thus realistically potential buyers are very few. 

Hints that China would be allowed buy such a vessel were quickly squashed.   

Let’s look at the short list.  France can and should bring one of these ships into its fleet. While the French navy has an aircraft carrier, another such smaller and more versatile naval platform would be perfect for operations and contingencies in the Mediterranean.  The French Navy has the expertise and the capacity to operate such vessels but with the declining defense budgets, would the current socialist government be so wise as to make this investment?

For the second vessel, the Sevastopol, which will be finished later this year there are only a few countries which have the credentials and the capacity to operate such a carrier.  The USA would profit from a Mistral without question, and given the U.S. Navy’s expanding role but overstretched number of ships, such a vessel would be perfect for Marine amphibious operations.  I don’t know if the Defense Department would buy (or be politically allowed to purchase), a foreign-built vessel.  Same goes for the British.

Few other NATO navies beyond Canada and Italy are really up to the technical challenge to deploy such a ship.  Beyond the Atlantic Alliance sphere what about Australia?   

The Mistral boasts the capacity to hold twelve attack helicopters, sixty armored vehicles, and 700 Marines, an ideal platform for versatile and rapid force projection. 

Until then, France will be looking for buyers lest the Mistrals becomes the Flying Dutchmen. 

Comment du Jour

Russia Blocks Inquiry on Malaysian Airliner Downing

In a callous but not unexpected move to block an international inquiry on the fate of Malaysian flight #17 which was shot down over Ukraine just a year ago, Russia has vetoed a resolution which would have set up a tribunal to investigate the disaster which killed 298 civilians.  The Malaysian civilian airliner, a Boeing 777, was shot down by a Russian supplied BUK missile  allegedly fired by Russian-backed separatists fighting the Ukraine government.  Moscow blames the Ukrainians for the disaster.

Eleven of the Security Council’ s fifteen members backed the draft resolution which would have set up a international tribunal to investigate the tragedy.  Besides Russia’s veto, China, Angola and  Venezuela predictably abstained on the vote.  

U.S./UN Ambassador Samantha Power stated bluntly, “Russia has callously disregarded the public outcry in the grieving nations.”  

The flight which originated in Amsterdam, was en route in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia;  a majority of the people killed were Australian or from the Netherlands.  Last year following the tragedy, the UN Security Council approved a resolution condemning the incident and demanding that those responsible be brought to justice. 

The Malaysian sponsored draft resolution, co-sponsored  by Australia, Germany, the Netherlands among others included a proposed statute for a “International Criminal Tribunal for Malaysian Airlines Fight MH 17.”

Dutch Foreign Minister Bert Koenders stated, “our purpose remains to create a timely, depoliticized and credible mechanism to ensure that the perpetrators face justice and are held to account.”  He expressed his “deep disappointment” over the Russian veto to stop the process.    

The MH 17 airliner was flying at 33,000 feet over a rebel held region of eastern Ukraine where both Russian backed separatists and Ukraine government troops were involved in heavy fighting.  

Why Moscow-supported separatists would even have access to or for that matter know how to operate a high altitude surface to air missile is a question. Equally in the midst of a bitter ground battle, why would either side decide to randomly fire upon a civilian airliner passing six miles above?   Though Moscow has accused the Ukrainians, most evidence points to the missile being fired by the rebels.

So here’s the point.  If Moscow is so convinced the Ukraine government forces committed the atrocity, why not then allow an impartial inquiry to gather evidence and try to prove the case?  Russian delegate Vitaly Churkin, in a lengthy rebuttal, asserted, “What are the grounds to be assured of the impartiality of such an investigation?”  He countered, what he called “aggressive propaganda in the media.”  

But by blocking such an impartial investigation the finger of guilt, by default, points to Moscow. 

Still Russia would rather face a lingering media presumption of guilt rather than an internationally established verdict of guilt. 

New Zealand Foreign Minister Murray McCully stated that while the Council had pressed for a consensus resolution he lamented that this is not a case “which can be seen in shades of grey; either we follow a path of accountability or there is impunity. ” 

Germany’s delegate Harald Braun put the matter in perspective, “Today this Council has utterly failed the victims, the families and the friends of the 283 passengers and 15 crew members killed, among them 4 German citizens, in the downing of MH 17.  But this does not mean that the perpetrators can triumph and hope for impunity.  We the grieving nations, will not rest until they are held accountable.”  

Ambassador Power warned, “The United States believes firmly that those who carried out this unspeakable crime cannot remain unnamed and unpunished…there cannot and will not be impunity.” 

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin added rhetorically; “There can be no reason to oppose this unless you are a perpetrator yourself.” 

Comment du Jour

Iran Deal; Obama’s Tarnished Legacy? 

A rhetorical tsunami followed the signing of the landmark nuclear limitation deal between Iran and six world powers in Vienna.  On the one hand President Barack Obama and his tireless Secretary of State John Kerry presented a technically well-crafted plan which would supposedly keep the Iranian nuclear genie in the bottle but not dismantle the actual atomic program.  On the other, deep bi-partisan skepticism in Washington greeted the deal with the nervous concern that it will not really stop Tehran’s long-term nuclear capabilities.  Now the accord faces a showdown in the U.S. Congress.  

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu bluntly called the deal a “stunning historical mistake.”  

Announcing the historic accord between the USA and the Islamic Republic of Iran, President Obama used the word “deal” 29 times!   The word deal has a far different nuance and connotation than accord or  agreement.  Deals are often associated with used cars while accords are better linked with diplomacy.  I’m surprised given the linguistic optics, that the State Department would not have opted to use a less edgy term.

But a deal is what we have with Iran’s clerical regime.  The suffocating economic and military sanctions slapped on Iran by both the United Nations Security Council and the United States will soon be lifted allowing for a massive jump-start for the moribund Iranian economy.  Ending an Iranian asset freeze moreover will release over $140 billion into Tehran’s coffers.  This will  help both the average Iranian as well as embolden and enrich the rulers.

Iran’s Foreign  Minister Mohammad Zarif  played a weak hand well, getting  a surprisingly good deal for the clerical regime.

Obama stated carefully that the deal  was “not built on trust but verification.”  Agreed. Yet such verifications are based on outside inspections.  Here’s a glaring problem: international inspections of sites inside Iran are not spontaneous but must be scheduled two weeks ahead. 

Echoes of Iraq in the 1990’s when UN arms inspectors played a cat-and -mouse game with Saddam?   Covering that endless exercise in the UN, I recall the maze that world powers faced   being blindsided by Baghdad despite having the support of seven Security Council resolutions. 

While experts will muse over the accord’s technical parameters, the geopolitical reverberations will be felt throughout the region.  Islamic Iran, a key player in funding terrorism and fueling a number of conventional conflicts such as Iraq and Yemen as well as supporting the Assad regime in Syria will now have more resources to aid its allies, mostly Shiite Moslems who are opposing the majority Sunnis.   We may see a spike in inter-Islamic tensions in the Middle East, as Iran is reinvigorated politically and ideologically.

There’s a deeper concern too.  In a belated quest to battle Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), a Sunni Muslim terror movement, the Obama administration has quietly looked to cooperating with Iran’s Shiites as a counterforce.  This empowers Iran regionally and threatens  trust with Washington’s Arab allies, not to mention Israel. 

Sunni Arab state reaction ironically mirrors Israel’s.  Shock and deep concern over the long range implications.  Arab monarchies such as the Saudis and the Gulf states, not to mention secular Egypt, are decidedly nervous. Turkey has been marginalized.   

  

Importantly the deal was not a bilateral negotiation between the U.S. and Islamic Iran but 

what was called the P-5 plus Germany meaning  the permanent members of the UN Security Council: China, France,  Russia, United Kingdom the United States and Germany.  

While those countries want to defuse Tehran’s nuclear weapons capacity, at the same time they wish to revive once cosy commercial links with Iran.  

Russia and China want to reopen lucrative trade, and eventual weapons sales with Iran as do   

the Europeans.   French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabuis, who to his credit was particularly tough in negotiations, now is set to visit Iran in the near future.  French economic ties with Iran were traditionally strong until sanctions slashed $4.4 billion in trade in 2004 down to $650 million in 2013.  French commercial delegations will soon head to Tehran to talk business as will the Germans and British! 

Nonetheless, the Islamic Republic of Iran remains one of the world’s most intolerant regimes fostering political and religious repression of its own people. 

Will the U.S. Congress support this deeply flawed deal? No matter how Congress votes, many observers view this accord as securing  Obama’s “political legacy.”  It just might, but not in the way the president wishes.  The Iranian mullahs may have the last laugh.

Comment du Jour

Love Locked in Paris 

Love may not be eternal in the City of Light after all.  In the name of safety, the City of Paris has removed the tens of thousands of Love Locks which have adorned the Pont des Arts.  The reason was not sentimental but ever so practical--these metal locks weight too much and are a danger on the iron railings and grills along the  Walkway/bridge which dates to 1801 but was rebuilt in the 1980's.

This is not a lame municipal excuse nor a nasty bureaucratic diktat but a very sober realization that heavily weighed down bridge panels and railings can very easily collapse into the Seine River below and crash into a boat, barge, or heaven forbid, a heavily laden tourist bateau.   Now the city authorities are planning to place many of the locks along the shoreline.  All kinds of plans are under consideration as not to break the tradition of lovers but at the same time protect people from falling panels weighing hundreds of pounds. 

So where can you still place a shiny brass lock on a storied Parisian bridge and throw away the key?

Just behind the Notre Dame Cathedral there's a small bridge the Pont de l'Archeveche which is glistening with thousands of brass locks most  inscribed, initialed, and glistening in the sun.  That is until the City of Paris swoops down in the name of safety and scoops them away.   

Comment du Jour

Starbucks Expanding in France!


The American premium coffee group Starbucks is expanding its operations throughout France.


Though known for its iconic Cafes, the Seattle-based Starbucks group has made inroads in France since the first Cafe opened in 2004 on Avenue de Opera in Paris.   Over  the past decade Starbucks added about 100 cafes mostly in the Paris region and in the southern city of Lyon.

Now the group is partnering with the French mega supermarket  Geant Casino to add an additional 100 cafes throughout the country.   As in the USA, Starbucks often has outlets in food markets and is expected to be part of a growing French trend of "le snacking" while shopping.  

Starbucks has over 22,000 cafes globally, many of them throughout Europe and Asia.

 

Comment du Jour

Bonjour!

Back in France!

While the world is watching the drama of the Greek Debt Crisis, indeed many of the other European countries are mired in red ink too!    Greek debt stands at a dizzying 177% of GDP.  In Italy the sum has reached 132%.

Debt has dangerously increased in France too where the amount of debt to Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has reached 97.5 %!!!    Just twenty years ago in 1995, debt comprised 56% of the French GDP.

In 2014, French debt stood at an unhealthy 95% of GDP, while Great Britain hit 89%, and Germany 75%   The European Union average last year stood at 87%!

May one politely ask, WHO is going to pay for this profligate spending???

Comment du Jour

Will the UN Stand up to "Cultural Cleansing" in Iraq and Syria?

Facing the onslaught of wanton destruction, cultural pillage, and a growing black market for stolen antiquities, both Iraq and Syria are feeling the brunt not only of the ideological violence of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), but the barbaric “cultural cleansing” of antiques dating back millennia.  As the Mid-East confronts the expansion of the ISIL terrorist state, we also face the unintended consequences of both historic destruction and equally the attacks on religious minorities such as the Christians and Yazidis.   

“Present day Iraq, known in classical antiquity as Mesopotamia, was home to the oldest civilizations in the world, “ according to UNESCO, “the Cradle of Civilization, Mesopotamia, as part of the Fertile Crescent, was a significant part of the ancient Near East.  Destruction of this history represents an attack to the ideals of humanism.”   

Ancient and storied Iraqi cities of the Assyrian kingdom such as Ninevah, Nimrud and Hatra have come under ISIL assault and pillage. 

At a UN roundtable on Countering Destruction and Trafficking in Cultural Property, Italian Ambassador Sebastiano Cardi stated, “there has been a recent spike in the barbaric destruction of and terrorist attacks on the cultural heritage of countries affected by armed conflict. This is together  with the unprecedented scale of organized looting and illicit trafficking in cultural objects.” 

Amb. Cardi stressed, “Such crimes seek to erode our collective cultural and historical heritage and are being used to intimidate populations.”   He added the actions “generate income for terrorist groups, to support their recruitment efforts and to strengthen their operational capability to organize and carry out  terrorist attacks.” 

An INTERPOL official openly admitted that ISIL uses such looting of archaeological sites as a “funding source.” 

Thus the shocking media images created by ISIL looting and smashing or cultural artifices such as in Mosul Museum and at storied historic sites, creates a huge demand for the antiquities which are being siphoned off for illicit international art markets and collectors.   

As with Khmer Rouge communist looting of Cambodia’s cultural legacy after 1975, much of the art then slips into the netherworld of lucrative art markets.  

In 1969, Italy became the first country to create a  special police division for cultural heritage and to fight illegal trafficking in stolen art.  Lt. Colonel Antonio Cappola of the Italian Carabinieri, told attendees that organized crime is involved in the trafficking.  The Italians have a special unit in Iraq, to monitor places “suffering the pillage of cultural patrimony.”

Deborah Lehr, Chair of the Capitol Archaeological Institute at George Washington University warned of  the widespread “cultural racketeering,”  where ISIL knows “huge profits are to be made.”  She stressed that saving Middle Eastern art “needs political will and champions.”  

As national legislation is usually too slow in most countries, Ms. Lehr suggested cultural Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) between governments to stem the tide, as well as working with auction houses to check on the provence of pieces in inventory.   

Amb. Dina Kawar of the Kingdom of Jordan decried the spread of Islamic State into Syria’s fabled Palmyra and added that the terrorists were mixing “ideological violence with cultural cleansing.” 

So what can be done?  Both the UN Security Council and General Assembly have passed resolutions prohibiting the cross border traffic and  trade in these cultural antiquities. 

UNESCO’s Director Irina Bokova, in a Cairo speech asserted, “The destruction of cultural heritage used as a tactic of war, to intimidate populations, to finance criminal activities, to spread hatred. ..the protection of heritage is far more than a cultural issue; it has become a security imperative.”   

UNESCO recommends a number of steps to stem the trade; to protect cultural zones, to integrate heritage into UN peacekeeping, monitor “cultural cleansing,”  having UN Blue Helmets for heritage sites, and crowd sourcing and reconnaissance drones to get images of the looters.  

Finding and focusing military power to stop ISIL, beyond the rhetoric, is difficult at best. President Barack Obama appears clueless at what to do or not to do.  Just 18 months ago, the President was brushing off ISIL as a “junior varsity” terrorist group.  Later, after stunning IS military successes throughout Iraq, the President was still pondering a lethal American response but conceded “we don’t have a strategy.”  Just last week when asked about a counter offensive, Barack Obama conceded, “we don’t yet have a complete strategy.”  The President’s honesty or simple indifference was stunning. 

The power vacuum created by a vacillating American leadership, combined with a largely incompetent Iraqi military, coupled with Iraq’s deep sectarian divisions in Islam,  have created a self-perpetuating crisis which threatens the cultural heritage, the ancient Christian communities under attack, as well as the majority Muslim populations in Iraq and Syria.  

The people are suffering and the ancient patrimony is at the whim of barbarians inside the gates.