France Back In NATO?

With Nicolas Sarkozy at the helm of government, relations between the US and France have warmed considerably. Sarkozy has adopted the American position on Iran and now leads European efforts to demand accountability from Teheran on their nuclear program. Can a French return to NATO be far behind? Not according to Ronald Asmus, who oversaw a close-run attempt ten years ago:

French President Nicolas Sarkozy has indicated his willingness to bring France back into NATO. It is an offer the United States should not refuse. Earlier in my career, I was a hard-liner on France and NATO. In fact, when I stepped down from the State Department in 2000, the French ambassador to Washington was so relieved he toasted my departure at a European Union ambassadors’ lunch because of my dogged pursuit of U.S. interests. (I considered it a back-handed compliment.)
But times change, and so should our thinking. …
In the wake of the Bush administration’s failings in Iraq and elsewhere, America’s image in Europe is at an all-time low. While official relations have warmed, public estrangement from the United States has not budged one inch — as public opinion studies, including the recent German Marshall Fund survey, have shown. Sarkozy is being strategically smart and politically courageous to buck this trend, but doing so is not without risk. And one can think of few things that would help America’s image in Europe today more than a public embrace by Paris.
The French president is scheduled to visit Washington next month, and NATO will undoubtedly be discussed. There are good deals and bad ones. In the months ahead, American diplomats and soldiers will negotiate hard to achieve the former. But the conditions France has thus far laid out, while still vague, should be achievable if the political will and strategic imagination exists. Let’s not miss this window of opportunity again.

Asmus lays out four reasons why he feels the time has arrived to get France back in NATO, but despite his self-professed “hard line” attitude, he still has some of this backward. NATO has survived and thrived without French participation for 40 years. In fact, the absence of the French have allowed us a less-complicated relationship with NATO and a far more cohesive NATO approach to conflicts — and even the addition of a Sarkozy-led France will add more complications.
Asmus assumes that adding France to NATO will give America more support for its foreign policy. That would only be true if Sarkozy wants to act as a rubber stamp for American foreign policy. Otherwise, France would act as another hurdle to climb to get NATO action on any issue. How does a French contingent in NATO help support American foreign policy — or does Asmus want a stronger French influence on our policy in order to make nice with the rest of Europe? He hints at this in this passage: “a French move toward NATO should be matched by a U.S. move toward a new and more strategic U.S.-E.U. relationship.”
We have a problem with NATO (sans France) refusing to meet its obligations to the mission in Afghanistan. Even those nations contributing troops have preconditions that force the US, British, Canadians, and eastern Europeans to do most of the fighting. Will adding France to this mix make that situation better or worse? What does France add militarily to NATO? Asmus argues that an alliance with France could bring “the right nexus between military power, development and governance,” without explaining why France is the sole resource for that nexus.
I don’t oppose a French return to NATO, but the goal of such a partnership should be an improvement in the alliance. France suffers from the same problem as most of Europe in military terms, which is a lack of investment thanks to American projection of power during the Cold War. It seems that Asmus argues for a French return to policy demands while offering little in the way of actual military benefit. If France wants to start investing in its military strength to give value to a NATO contribution, then it sounds like a good deal. Otherwise, we have other ways to strengthen the friendship with France.

30 thoughts on “France Back In NATO?”

  1. The part I find bizarre is that Franco-American relations are improving.
    Yet, Dubya remains in power.
    This would almost suggest that poor relations with France was a function of who lived in the Elysee Palace, rather than who was in the White House!
    No doubt an example of simplisme?

  2. French President Nicolas Sarkozy is only one Frenchmen and that is not enough.
    Between “Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without your accordion” by then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and “Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys” by “The Simpsons'” Groundskeeper Willie, it’s hard to believe that the time has come so soon.

  3. When I visited France this past summer, I found it being surprisingly America-like, with SUV and big shopping malls springing all over the country. Also, I didn’t have any problems with my (very) poor French, in fact I was amazed by warmth and patience they were treating me with (here’s note for the late night show hosts: it is time to update your files on French “rudeness”).
    I think France realized British diplomatic gains from going with US and their own very infertile alliance with Germany. It is also a change of hart of the intellectual elites and relative weakness of rabid and blindfolded leftists running public affairs, as is the case in Italy. French realized, that America has the best experience in integrating immigrants, something Europe is struggling aimlessly, submerged in the pink fog of political correctness.
    Finally, the realpolitik requires acting on the fact, that the enemy is not on this side of the pond, but out east, with Russian nostalgia for the lost Empire combined with fanatic Islam and growing Chinese and India’s powerhouses.

  4. I suspect that the real purpose of NATO was to co-opt Europe’s armies so the Soviets wouldn’t be tempted to step in the next time Europe’s sophisticated diplomacy resulted in a mutual lunge for the throat.
    So heck yes, let France back in: it’s not like NATO’s going to fight a war. Au contraire.

  5. What do we get out of France “rejoining” NATO? Unless Sarko’s going to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan, thanks but no thanks.

  6. I was stationed in France with the U.S. Air Force when DeGalle decided to withdraw from NATO. We were forced to withdraw our entire military presence out of France, along with all other NATO counties. As a result, I will NEVER trust the French about anything. They are all about their own interests at all times. If you read any history, thats the way they’ve always been.
    And yes, if you are visiting France and spending lots of dollars, they will be very friendly, that is, until the dollars stop flowing. For the two years I was there (1965-1966) that’s the way we were treated. And a lepord doesn’t change spots.

  7. I question the value of Americas participation in NATO in the Post Cold War world.
    Intransigent, unhelpful, fulfilling obligations only if it is politically expedient. To quote from “The King & I”, “If allies are too weak am I not better off standing on my own”?

  8. As demonstrated by the NATO performance and their failure to meet their commitments in Afghanistan it matters little whether France returns to the military command structure. European nations lack the political will to defend themselves against any threat foreign or domestic and this makes them a liability to the United States. NATO isn’t going away anytime soon but it no longer has any real value to the US security.
    In anticipation of the usual suspects posting about all the “help” we get from NATO forces in Afghanistan I will point out that besides some limited help from Dutch and Danish special forces the only NATO allies who engage in offensive combat against the Taliban and AQ foreign fighters are the Canadians and British forces. This isn’t NATO. It is the D-Day coalition.

  9. The refusal of NATO members to fulfill the pledges they made concerning Afghanistan is something that they have not been made to pay for in my opinion. They made promises, they have reneged on them, and what has America done? We continue to try to cling to them as part of some outdated Atlanticist geopolitical strategy, when we should be dumping them on the side of the road where they belong and getting closer to countries like ourselves that are either on the rise or have a realistic capacity of still rising, like India. The Administration’s successes of the past five years in relations with India have, seemingly, disappeared in the last few months, and I think that this Administration’s failure to keep India firmly on a path to closer alliance with the US (barring a turnaround) will be looked at in thirty years as Bush’s biggest foreign policy failure.

  10. I like the French. At their best, they’re a clever people, and good allies. Their assistance was essential to winning the American Revolution.
    That said, I’m not particularly fond of many of their current politicians. And of course, given the NATO Alliance’s many recent failures to support policies upon which we all are agreed, the deeper strategic question is: do we need NATO any more? Should we instead create a new, strategic alliance of Western, democratic powers to replace the U.N.?

  11. Actually, jerry, Turkey sent their Special Forces into Afghanistan alongside the U.S. in 2001 when we invaded Afghanistan, and long before NATO got off the dime to support our efforts there.
    In May of 2007, for example, among other military committments, Turkey provided the Afghan National Army with three artillery batteries, weapons, ammunition, support equipment and training, most training conducted inside Turkey, for the newly constituted Afghan National Army.
    Along with France and Italy, separate from ISAF, Turkey is working on the ground with the Afghans to establish a military that is being built along NATO lines, with interoperability being a key effort.
    As for France re-joining NATO, this is something many in France have advocated for years but were pushed aside by Chirac and the Left. For France to have any real meaning within Europe, their becoming part of NATO is essential. Their “joint” France-German brigade has proven to be an empty shell. Having a voice in NATO, having their military able to interact with a high degree of interoperability, full participation in NATO will provide benefits to France and to Europe overall. Sarkozy recognizes this.

  12. France was one of NATO’s founding members and has never left the Alliance. However, in 1966 de Gaulle withdrew France from NATO’s integrated military command, probably as a reaction to what he perceived as US hegemony in Europe and to drive France out from under the so-called US nuclear umbrella.
    NATO’s integrated military command is organized to implement the collective security requirements of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which requires that the Alliance consider an attack against one as an attack against all. But the military command is and always has been under the complete control of NATO’s political structure, of which France has remained a member.
    After Franco died, Spanish participation in NATO became palatable to European members, and procedures for Spain’s entry into the Alliance were ratified in 1982. But then a Socialist, Felipe Gonzalez, became Prime Minister, and Spain, too, opted out of NATO’s integrated military command.
    So France isn’t rejoining NATO – she’s just considering reintegrating into the military command structure. Personally, I hope she does. I don’t know about her politicians, but I used to work with some of her soldiers and sailors. We could use their expertise.

  13. Coldwarrior:
    You I right. I forgot about the Turks but they are the odd man out in the Alliance these days.

  14. Did anyone notice that in the 60 Minutes interview, Sarkozy walked out mid-way, saying “Bon Courage”??
    Was that a slap at CBS and Dan Rather??!!

  15. NATO is as useful a military alliance as the UN is a political one–that is to say pretty damn useless. Having participated in several “NATO” operations and exercises during my military career there was one constant–the lack of participation by other members.
    There would be token forces but int he end if 1000 NATO soldiers were deployed 900 would be American, 75 Brits, 10 Aussies, a couple of Canadians and the rest made up of the smaller eastern European countries. It would be “Joint” so long as things went well or there was money and/or technology to hand out, but let the feces hit the fan and it soon became a “US Only” operation and we bore the brunt of the blame.

  16. Swede and Faith+1,
    My experience with France is that their military is very competent. But like our own military, perceptions can vary depending on how the military is used by the civilian leadership. So I would caution against blaming the soldiers and sailors for operational constraints imposed by politicians.
    Your experience may be that the French military can’t fight, but mine isn’t. And it’s the professional interaction at the military level that I’ll welcome if France reintegrates into NATO’s military structure.

  17. “Good Allies” — such a kidder.
    Tell that to Joan of Arc. And the infant United States’ first war with another country was with…France!.
    And the USA’s first ground combat in the WWII ETO was against Vichy France!.
    And when the US retaliated against Libya in 1986 for killing US servicemen in a Berlin disco bombing, France denied the strike aircraft overflight passage.
    In fairness, the French can be as unilateral (Rainbow Warrior) as the US, and much more ruthless (Algeria). They can deploy the Foreign Legion without domestic political backlash (very handy with the French constitutional limits on deploying conscripted French nationals).
    Just remember that France is the living embodiment of “Nations have only permanent interests, not permanent allies”. Their interests in places like Syria or Lebanon or the Horn of Africa, where they have a colonial history and a continuing involvement, may not always be the same as ours.
    By all means welcome back the French, but keep’em where we can see them.
    –furious

  18. French competence…
    I understand the French Interior Ministry are much less squeamish about “aggressive interrogation techniques” than are, say, Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
    And at least the French have the air/sea-lift capability to deploy/project their own forces abroad. Unlike much of NATO who, for instance, had to rely on American logistics to deploy at all to Kosovo.
    –furious

  19. “In the wake of the Bush administration’s failings in Iraq”
    Anyone who starts off like this loses all credibility. As we all know the surge has been a far reaching and surprising success. I guess the narrative must remain the same no matter the facts.

  20. “Your experience may be that the French military can’t fight, but mine isn’t.”
    Mike Williams,
    Sorry, but don’t read into my post something I didn’t say. My post wasn’t about the competency of any of their military forces. My post was on the fact that when push comes to shove they don’t bother to show up or show up with such only a token force their military competence or lack thereof is irrelevant.

  21. Faith+1,
    French did a few quick and quite effective (read: ruthless) operations all by themselves in the last several years (and they didn’t let their MSM in to look for “the Abu Grab”, or whatever). You are talking about political will to “support” the Great Satan, while one can play peaceniks hand in hand with the Germans. I hope that the French shift will last longer than the Sarkozy’s presidential term, but there is a shift, no doubt about it IMHO and it is a good thing, as soon as our political leaders can effectively take advantage of it.

  22. If the Europeans hate us, there’s nothing we can do to make them love us, except give in to their demands that we neuter ourselves.
    Europe is neutered, and impotence loves company. Europeans want us to be as weak and ineffectual as they are.
    This is the main reason why Europeans hate us and Israel, which is a fellow socialist nation. Israel is the only socialist nation that’s also a global military power, and that makes Europeans insane with rage.
    Personally, I don’t care what the European man on the street thinks of me. Europeans don’t care what we think about them, so let’s return the favor.

  23. No re-entry into NATO for the French until they DEMONSTRATE that the vaunted French Nuclear Force is actually capable of launching a missile.
    I kinda tend to think they’re rotting in their holes, myself, and we’ve got no particular need for “someone else to defend”…

  24. There’s nothing wrong with France’s current direction, but it won’t last and then they will be right back to trying to frustrate whatever the US is trying to achieve.
    The wisest course would be to keep them out of NATO (which pretty much guarantees that the State Department will be found, as here, consistently on the side of bringing them back in).

  25. France is thinking about rejoining Nato? That’s like thinking about merging with a dead and stinking halibut laying on the beach.
    Nato is hollow with all the mititary power residing in one place: the US component. All the others are allong for a profitable free ride. We should just declare that it has served it’s purpose and is obsolete. Let Europeans worry alone about a resurgeant Russian Empire. It has certainly cost the US taxpayer enough.

  26. Will they or won’t they? Either way I’m still happy that Sarkozy got elected. Our relations with France these last 30 years could not get worse.
    On the possible upside, France acts like a “woman scorned” when she rises to action. A few more riots, car burnings and a terrorist event inside France and the American public, especially the left, will be shocked by the brutality of the French response. A casual perusal of their African adventures will convince even the strongest skeptics.
    France still has a very outsized voice in the third world and on the left. If they were to commit to the war on terror in a public way(they are very much involved behind the scenes)the war would go easier. However time is of essence. Sarkozy’s thin skin may prove to be his undoing.

  27. If the Europeans hate us, there’s nothing we can do to make them love us, except give in to their demands that we neuter ourselves.
    Having spent some time recently in Europe, I can tell you with all honesty that the average European doesn’t hate America or Americans anywhere nearly as much as we sometimes tend to think. This idea is yet another example of our dominant media overprojecting their own attitudes onto others. I assume that it’s much more true if you’re strictly talking about Europe’s so-called “elite” however.
    It is certainly true that Europe is politically somewhat to the left of America and that they don’t always see eye-to-eye with us on our foreign policy interests, but the gap isn’t nearly as big as the press likes to make it out to be. Unfortunately though, most of the Europeans who have never been to America don’t know much about us except for what they see through the lens of Hollywood and their own press, which is certainly a bit of a problem for us.
    The good news however is that as the Islamofascist vermin continue to export their twisted Holy War into continental Europe, the native populations of those countries will come ever closer and closer to us. Trust me, they all aren’t just going to simply roll over and die all that easily.

  28. In Winning Modern Wars, General Clark says he almost drove the Euro Natos batty. They were stunned and defiant that he blew off their ideas of nibbling away at Milsoevic’s precious assets hoping he would realize the folly of his ways and return to the family of nations. General Clark preferred going for the throat General Jackson, Sherman and Patton.
    First thing Zarkozy did was to deploy the De Gaulle near the Persian Gulf under US command.
    When I was visiting France in 2002, the French could be stuck up – especially when they realized you were American – it could be tempered with really trying to speak French, though it helped to be brazen when they hit you up with the “You Americains – you have so much of everything.” the one reply that got respect was “Yessir. Especially cruise missiles and stealth bombers”
    If France wants to rejoin NATO let them.

Comments are closed.