French Leader Backtracks On Iran

In Reversal, Chirac Now Says Iran Having Nuclear Weapons Is Unacceptable

(AP)  President Jacques Chirac backtracked Thursday and said a nuclear-armed Iran would be unacceptable, reversing earlier comments that Tehran's possession of a nuclear bomb would not be "very dangerous."

"France, along with the international community, cannot accept the prospect of an Iran equipped with a nuclear weapon," Chirac's office said in a statement seeking to limit fallout from the French leader's remarks to the International Herald Tribune and two other publications.

"The Iranian nuclear program is opaque and therefore dangerous for the region," the statement added. It urged Tehran to suspend uranium enrichment, and said the United Nations would respond to such a move by suspending sanctions and that negotiations with Tehran would resume.

The statement followed a remarkable morning of damage-control by Chirac's office, which took the unusual step of asking reporters to come over in person for a clarification about his comments that Iran's possession of a nuclear weapon would not be "very dangerous" and that if used on Israel, Tehran would be immediately "razed."

Chirac, who made the comments during a Monday interview, called reporters back the next day to try to have his quotes retracted.

The publications said the interview was tape-recorded and on the record.

Chirac's initial remarks — which would have marked a major departure from France's official policy of working to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons — prompted sharp criticism and protest from experts and the opposition Socialist Party. His office said that foreign governments were also asking for an official clarification.

"I should rather have paid attention to what I was saying and understood that perhaps I was on the record," Chirac said in the second interview on Tuesday, according to transcripts that the three publications posted on their Web sites.

On Monday, Chirac said of Iran and its nuclear program: "I would say that what is dangerous about this situation is not the fact of having a nuclear bomb. Having one or perhaps a second bomb a little later, well, that's not very dangerous."

Instead, Chirac said, the danger lies in the chances of proliferation or an arms race in the Middle East should Iran build a nuclear bomb. Possessing the weapon would be useless for Iran — whose leader has called for Israel to be "wiped off the map" — as using it would mean an instant counterattack, he said.

"Where will it drop it, this bomb? On Israel?" Chirac asked. "It would not have gone 200 meters into the atmosphere before Tehran would be razed."

A French official, who briefed reporters on condition that he not be identified, confirmed that Chirac had later retracted his original comments on Iran, and said the president had been speaking in a "strategic" or hypothetical way about nuclear deterrence involving Iran — not about "diplomacy."

The official said Chirac had spoken hastily and that his reasoning "was missing a few steps," prompting the president to call back the reporters. He said Chirac's idea was to point out how unthinkable it would be that Iran could even consider using a nuclear weapon.

In the second interview with the same publications, Chirac retracted his comment about Tehran being razed. "I retract it, of course, when I said, 'One is going to raze Tehran,"' he said.

Chirac also said other countries would stop any bomb launched by Iran from reaching its target.

"It is obvious that this bomb, at the moment it was launched, obviously would be destroyed immediately," he said. "We have the means — several countries have the means to destroy a bomb."

Regarding his comments that Israel could be a target of an Iranian weapon and that Israel would retaliate, Chirac said: "I don't think I spoke about Israel yesterday. Maybe I did so but I don't think so. I have no recollection of that."

The U.N. Security Council recently imposed limited sanctions — which Chirac supported — to punish Iran for defying a resolution demanding that it suspend uranium enrichment, a process that can produce fissile material to fuel nuclear reactors or, at purer concentrations, the core of nuclear weapons.

The U.S. and its allies accuse Iran of secretly trying to develop nuclear weapons, an allegation Tehran denies, insisting it only wants to produce energy. Bush administration officials have said diplomacy was the focus of their policy on Iran but have never ruled out attacks on Iran.

Chirac, 74, is not expected to seek a third term in the two-round presidential election in April and May.

The two leading candidates to succeed Chirac — Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy and Socialist Segolene Royal — have both said that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons.

Sarkozy has called the prospect of an Iranian bomb "terrifying." His spokeswoman, Rachida Dati, on Thursday reacted to Chirac's comments by saying that Sarkozy has "always been clear" in his opposition to a nuclear-armed Iran.

Royal has said that Tehran should not even have access to civilian nuclear power. That stance has elicited criticism since under the terms of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Iran is allowed to have a civilian nuclear program.

Royal's spokesman, former Culture Minister Jack Lang, said that Chirac had committed an "unforgivable" error.

[se4h4wk]

Yes, Chirac was a very responsible and sensitive person about the War In Iraq.

But now we need to get out of this mess and be constructive on the subject.

"Oh, and GW Lafayette.....oh uneducated LEFT WING American......why did the French help us during the Revolutionary war? Mainly due to their war with England and in exchange for land."

by bigwhtpony


Please learn about Marquis de La Fayette who served as a General of the US Army during the America Revolutionnary War. This young French Man was a friend of George Washington and many others US eminent (Jefferson, Franklin etc...)

He joined the fight unofficially because he loved America as many of us. But finally he persuaded King Louis XVI to sent the Royal Navy and troops to support the US insurgents and he was right for sure ! 10 000 French Soldiers were sent there and with the American troops they crushed the British Army at Yorktown, VA.

America and France are friends for more than 2 centuries.

And we have to protect each other fighting terrorism and preventing Iran or North Korea to threaten our interests.

[scouser691]

Didn't Chirac warn that invading Iraq would create a disaster. Probably explains why mention of Chirac drives Bush muppets insane. He was right, Bush was wrong, live with it muppets.

[tibu987]

Hey, Chirac is becoming more American everyday.
He has learned how to flip flop on important issues.
And I thought that was just a Washington pols tick. Perhaps it's contagious. I hope not.

[thejameso]

poor france having an idiot for a president

[gwlafayette]

prove me wrong bigwhtpony, you are obviously very educated. hurling insults and putting overused quotes do not make any points. cant wait to hear from you again.

[gwlafayette]

Of course France supported America because of its war with England, they didnt want America to be England. They didnt want America to be France either, so what is your point? We would not even know who George Washington is if they did not help us then. France has statues of George Washington in Paris, which other countries do? So tell me, why did America not save France until Germany and Japan declared war on us? America saved France because it was on the way to Germany. Can you show me the extensive support that France gave to the Confederacy? I will show you their support of the North. But why does that matter anyway, neither GB or France had an impact on our civil war, why did you bring this up?

And by the way, Im not left wing, I hope Romney or Tancredo is our next president. And I attack left wingers, actually more often. In my experience though, the anti-french right are the most pathetic Americans around today. They are the ones that hug and kiss Saudi royalty, they ones who caused 9/11.

[Syndicate]

This is fascinating totoally fascinating. Chirac just admitted they have an antimissle defense system. The type everyone gives us grief over for developing. He also hit the nail on the head. Iran possing nuclear weapons is not so bad. Its them giving them to Hezbollah that is the danger.

[diverinnl]

Hey GWLafayette,

How many Frenchmen does it take to defend Paris?

Nobody knows, they've never tried! LOL

[bigwhtpony]

Oh, and GW Lafayette.....oh uneducated LEFT WING American......why did the French help us during the Revolutionary war? Mainly due to their war with England and in exchange for land.

Why did the French back the confederates during the Civil War? Because they loved America? I think not.

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt!"

So, if you don't know what you're talking about, as you obviously do not, shut you pie hole! :)

[bigwhtpony]

How do you say, "a**kissing coward" in French?
Don't worry, Jacques. You'll be under Sharia law before you know it - you bunch of candya**ed socialists! And you will deserve every bit of what you get.

[rharrin1]

skyk

He comes dogs breeding.

[se4h4wk]

Chirac's blunder !

Mister President, you sound so tired at this time...You were a good president during the last 12 years but now you need a break and we need too.

Pay attention before saying anything else on the subject by now...

[gwlafayette]

The French surrender joke never seems to get old to uneducated right-wing Americans. Its weird how they dont care to ever be the least bit clever or original. Its strange how they never seem to recall the times when the French saved us, like during the birth of America. But anyway, France is a much smaller country that is an extremely desirable place, thats why the Germans always try to steal it, and now Africans and Arabs are trying to steal it. France knows that they will be the ones that take the heat in Europe so they are extremely careful about what they say and do, and they want to delay their next inevitable invasion. They are also smart enough to know that it will come eventually. None of the western powers (US UK and France) can afford to fall out of favor with each other. Irans leader has openly threatened Israel and the Europe/France and I think (and hope) the French are finally realizing that a showdown is going to happen sometime, so they can wait for Iran to get the bomb.

[dogsoul]

Hey it's ok, liberals love to throw around fascist this & fascist that - everything to them is fascist unless, of course, it comes from them...

All I'm saying is that French support against Iran's nuclear amitions might help sway liberals to do the same - even though Bush & Israel are against it as well... but unless we can also get Islamic Radicals to weigh in against Iran's nuclear prospects, I doubt we'll see any liberal support on this front.

Yes - the U.S. was the only power to have used a nuclear device - and following that point, if Germany or Japan had gotten their hands on the weapon as was their intent, I wonder if they'd have used it? I see we've got people who don't want ANYone to have nuclear weapons - that's nice - ooooh hey, I just got a call from reality, they're wondering if you're gonna join in on the conference call....

[agnim]

"Surprise! Surprise! A Frenchman in retreat.

Posted by Winstrv at 12:21 PM : Feb 01, 2007"

LOL

At least give the french LEADER the credit of having enough common sense to NOT "STAY THE COURSE", unlike some incompetent leader we both know! LOL

[reel-crazy]

It appears Chirac originally didn't mind watching Iran's fuse get closer to the fireworks until he saw it actually wasn't a dud. It's refreshing to see flip-flopping leaders exist elsewhere on the planet.

[notblue]

skyk, you should be an expert on god awful creatures, nobody in these comment areas demonstrates through words more hatred than you. Anybody not in goosestep with your twisted American hating ideology is immediately compared to nazis along with your usual blather of nazisms. You need to leave this great country if you think it's that bad. What possible good can come from your ignorant condiscending carping. Even the weekest leftwing ruler on the planet is for not allowing Iran to have nukes. If the civilized countries that have nukes had the same attitude as the radical countries in the middle east it would be giant ashtray over there by now. I'm sure anyone of those middle east countries would welcome Arsholes like you with open arms, your a poster boy for the enemy.

[gangesdak]

Case of Isreal and India is different from Pakistan. Isreal and India are established democracies, while Pakistan never was. Pakistan is partner to the US against terrorism for unclear reasons. Most of today's terrorism has been either hatched in Pakistan or committed by people from Pakistan. Yesterday's news from UK testifies that Pakistani descents, even those who are born in Britain, would resort to terrorism.

[karlimhof]

HEY - WHY DOESN'T OUR "ALLY" ISRAEL STEP UP TO THE PLATE AND GIVE US A HAND WITH IRAN ?

THEY COULD GIVE UP THEIR NUKES, WHICH SERVE THEM, NOR US, ABSOLUTELY NO PURPOSE - AND WE COULD THEN PROCEED TO MAKE R E A L PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

IF WE CONTINUE WITH OUR DOUBLE STANDARDS HOW CAN WE HOPE TO BE AN HONEST BROKER ?

[skyk-2009]

wow, well if the French are against Iran having nukes - there's a chance liberals might follow suit; of course, it's a tough call seeing as I'd imagine liberals would be hard pressed to side with Bush & Israel, who ALSO don't want Iran to have nukes. Plus, since Islamic Radicals DO want nukes - that'd probably win over liberals to their side in the end...
Posted by dogsoul at 11:11 AM : Feb 01, 2007

I must say one thing about you fascist, you are VERY narrow minded. To you EVERYTHING that you can possibably use to create hatred for those who do not agree with you, you use! Were DO you god awlful creatures come from?