Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Chirac-Hussein Connection
STRATFOR ^ | Feb 19, 2003 | Staff

Posted on 02/19/2003 7:25:26 AM PST by Axion

The Chirac-Hussein Connection
Feb 19, 2003

Summary

French President Jacques Chirac is a pivotal figure on the international scene, whose views on Iraq are of vital concern. Those views are not driven simply by geopolitics, however. The factors that shape his thinking include a long, complex and sometimes mysterious relationship with Saddam Hussein. The relationship is not secret, but it is no longer as well known as it once was -- nor is it well known outside of France. It is not insignificant in understanding Chirac's view of Iraq.

Analysis

In attempting to understand France’s behavior over the issue of war with Iraq, there is little question but that strategic, economic and geopolitical considerations are dominant drivers. However, in order to understand the details of French behavior, it is also important to understand a not really unknown but oddly neglected aspect of French policy: the personal relationship between French President Jacques Chirac and Saddam Hussein.

The relationship dates back to late 1974, when then-French Premier Chirac traveled to Baghdad and met the No. 2 man in the Iraqi government, Vice President Saddam Hussein. During that visit, Chirac and Hussein conducted negotiations on a range of issues, the most important of these being Iraq’s purchase of nuclear reactors.

In September 1975, Hussein traveled to Paris, where Chirac personally gave him a tour of a French nuclear plant. During that visit, Chirac said, “Iraq is in the process of beginning a coherent nuclear program and France wants to associate herself with that effort in the field of reactors.” France sold two reactors to Iraq, with the agreement signed during Hussein’s visit. The Iraqis purchased a 70-megawatt reactor, along with six charges of 26 points of uranium enriched to 93 percent -- in other words, enough weapons-grade uranium to produce three to four nuclear devices. Baghdad also purchased a one-megawatt research reactor, and France agreed to train 600 Iraqi nuclear technicians and scientists -- the core of Iraq’s nuclear capability today.

Other dimensions of the relationship were decided on during this visit and implemented in the months afterward. France agreed to sell Iraq $1.5 billion worth of weapons -- including the integrated air defense system that was destroyed by the United States in 1991, about 60 Mirage F1 fighter planes, surface-to-air missiles and advanced electronics. The Iraqis, for their part, agreed to sell France $70 million worth of oil.

During this period, Chirac and Hussein formed what Chirac called a close personal relationship. As the New York Times put it in a 1986 report about Chirac’s attempt to return to the premiership, the French official “has said many times that he is a personal friend of Saddam Hussein of Iraq.” In 1987, the Manchester Guardian Weekly quoted Chirac as saying that he was “truly fascinated by Saddam Hussein since 1974.” Whatever personal chemistry there might have been between the two leaders obviously remained in place a decade later, and clearly was not simply linked to the deals of 1974-75. Politicians and businessmen move on; they don’t linger the way Chirac did.

Partly because of the breadth of the relationship Chirac and Hussein had created in a relatively short period of time and the obvious warmth of their personal ties, there was intense speculation about the less visible aspects of the relationship. For example, one unsubstantiated rumor that still can be heard in places like Beirut was that Hussein helped to finance Chirac’s run for mayor of Paris in 1977, after he lost the French premiership. Another, equally unsubstantiated rumor was that Hussein had skimmed funds from the huge amounts of money that were being moved around, and that he did so with Chirac’s full knowledge. There are endless rumors, all unproven and perhaps all scurrilous, about the relationship. Some of these might have been moved by malice, but they also are powered by the unfathomability of the relationship and by Chirac’s willingness to publicly affirm it. It reached the point that Iranians referred to Chirac as “Shah-Iraq” and Israelis spoke of the Osirak reactor as “O-Chirac.”

Indeed, as recently as last week, a Stratfor source in Lebanon reasserted these claims as if they were incontestable. Innuendo has become reality.

Former French President Valery Giscard d’Estaing, who held office at the time of the negotiations with Iraq, said in 1984 that the deal “came out of an agreement that was not negotiated in Paris and therefore did not originate with the president of the republic.” Under the odd French constitution, it is conceivable that the president of the republic wouldn’t know what the premier of France had negotiated -- but on a deal of this scale, this would be unlikely, unless the deal in fact had been negotiated between Chirac and Hussein in the dark and presented as a fait accompli.

There is some evidence for this notion. Earlier, when Giscard d’Estaing found out about the deal -- and particularly about the sale of 93 percent uranium -- he had ordered the French nuclear research facility at Saclay to develop an alternative that would take care of Iraq’s legitimate needs, but without supplying weapons-grade uranium. The product, called “caramel,” was only 3 percent enriched but entirely suitable to non-weapons needs. The French made the offer, which Iraq declined.

By 1986, Chirac clearly had decided to change his image. In preparation for the 1988 presidential elections, Chirac let it be known that he never had anything to do with the sale of the Osirak reactor. In an interview with an Israeli newspaper, he said, “It wasn’t me who negotiated the construction of Osirak with Baghdad. The negotiation was led by my minister of industry in very close collaboration with Giscard d’Estaing.” He went on to say, “I never took part in these negotiations. I never discussed the subject with Saddam Hussein. The fact is that I did not find out about the affair until very late.”

Obviously, Chirac was contradicting what he had said publicly in 1975. More to the point, he also was not making a great deal of sense in claiming that his minister of industry – who at that time was Michel d’Ornano -- had negotiated a deal as large as this one. That is true even if one assumes the absurd, which was that the nuclear deal was a stand-alone and not linked to the arms and oil deals or to a broader strategic relationship. In fact, d’Ornano claimed that he didn’t even make the trip to Iraq with Chirac in 1974, let alone act as the prime negotiator. Everything he did was in conjunction with Chirac.

In 1981, the Israelis destroyed the Iraqi reactor in an air attack. There were rumors – which were denied -- that the French government was offering to rebuild the reactor. In August 1987, French satirical and muckraking magazine, “Le Canard Enchaine” published excerpts of a letter from Chirac to Hussein -- dated June 24, 1987, and hand-delivered by Trade Minister Michel Noir -- which the magazine claimed indicated that he was negotiating to rebuild the Iraqi reactor. The letter says nothing about nuclear reactors, but it does say that Chirac hopes for an agreement “on the negotiation which you know about,” and it speaks of the “cooperation launched more than 12 years ago under our personal joint initiative, in this capital district for the sovereignty, independence and security of your country.” In the letter, Chirac also, once again, referred to Hussein as “my dear friend.”

Chirac and the government confirmed that the letter was genuine. They denied that it referred to rebuilding a nuclear reactor. The letter speaks merely of the agreements relating to “an essential chapter in Franco-Iraqi relations, both in the present circumstances and in the future.” Chirac claimed that any attempt to link the letter to the reconstruction of the nuclear facility was a “ridiculous invention.” Assuming Chirac’s sincerity, this leaves open the question of what the “essential chapter” refers to and why, instead of specifying the subject, Chirac resorted to a circumlocution like “negotiation which you know about.”

Only two possible conclusions can be drawn from this letter: Chirac either was trying, in the midst of the Iran-Iraq war and after his denial of involvement in the first place, to rebuild Iraq’s nuclear capability, or he wasn’t. And if he wasn’t, what was he doing that required such complex language, clearly intended for deniability if revealed? No ordinary state-to-state relationship would require a combination of affection, recollection of long history and promise for the future without mentioning the subject. If we concede to Chirac that it had nothing to do with nuclear reactors, then the mystery actually deepens.

It is unfair to tag Chirac with the rumors that have trailed him in his relations with Hussein. It is fair to say, however, that Chirac has created a circumstance for breeding rumors. The issues raised here were all well known at one time and place. When they are laid end-to-end, a mystery arises. What affair was being discussed in the letter delivered by Michel Noir? If not nuclear reactors, then what was referenced but never mentioned specifically in Chirac’s letter to his “dear friend” Hussein?

Whatever the answer, it is clear that the relationship between Chirac and Hussein is long and complex, and not altogether easy to understand. That relationship does not, by itself, explain all of France's policies toward Iraq or its stance toward a war between the United States and Iraq. But at the same time, it is inconceivable that this relationship has no effect on Chirac's personal decision-making process. There is an intensity to Chirac's Iraq policy that simply may signify the remnants of an old, warm friendship gone bad, or that may have a different origin. In any case, it is a reality that cannot be ignored and that must be taken into account in understanding the French leader’s behavior.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: chirac; hussein; saddam; warlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-88 last
To: MizSterious
The press will not expose the motives of this functionary of the French/EU apparatus. It undermines their profession's avowed political position.
51 posted on 02/19/2003 1:42:41 PM PST by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Axion
"...at the same time, it is inconceivable that this relationship has no effect on Chirac's personal decision-making process..."

What a piece of dirt.At least we know where his head is now.He's probably got Billions of dollars invested in Iraq.Which country is going to be next? Don Rumsfeld must've known about this when he referred to France as the 'Old Europe'. Mr. Chirac, should become 'Persona Non Grata' with George W. Bush and soon.

52 posted on 02/19/2003 1:50:55 PM PST by Pagey (Hillary Rotten is a Smug , Holier-Than-Thou Socialist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Axion
bump
53 posted on 02/19/2003 1:52:13 PM PST by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Axion
Bookmarked for reference.
54 posted on 02/19/2003 2:26:42 PM PST by Ladysmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ladysmith
bump and bookmark
55 posted on 02/19/2003 3:05:13 PM PST by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious
They don't. It would make the case for the US.
56 posted on 02/19/2003 3:38:00 PM PST by knighthawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Axion
In 1987, the Manchester Guardian Weekly quoted Chirac as saying that he was “truly fascinated by Saddam Hussein since 1974.”

Yeah, the French also had that same fascination with Hitler. Don't be fooled by French propaganda about the French Resistance. There was virtually NO French Resistance until it looked like Germany was going to be defeated. Back in the 1940-1942 period almost all the French were enthusiastic collaborators with the Germans.

57 posted on 02/19/2003 3:45:41 PM PST by PJ-Comix (The Early Bird Gets The Early Worm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Axion
Only one good thing about the French---they helped to ruin Disney. Years ago Michael Eisner had the option of locating EuroDisney in either France or Spain. The Spaniards would have LOVED EuroDisney but in an act of complete STUPIDITY, Eisner chose to locate it in the WORST place on the Planet. No one hates Americans more than the French and they have demonstrated that by refusing to patronize EuroDisney.
58 posted on 02/19/2003 4:01:37 PM PST by PJ-Comix (The Early Bird Gets The Early Worm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Axion
Wow. I'm really shocked. No, really.

It reached the point that Iranians referred to Chirac as “Shah-Iraq” and Israelis spoke of the Osirak reactor as “O-Chirac.”

It appears that "Cherche le juif" is once again official French policy.

59 posted on 02/19/2003 4:49:44 PM PST by Mr. Silverback (Sorry, the guy who writes my taglines deployed to Qatar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Axion
Jacques Chirac is demonically possessed. If Hitler was still around, he'd be his ally, too, like he's Saddam's ally.
60 posted on 02/19/2003 4:54:20 PM PST by tomahawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MizSterious
**Anyone know if any of the major news orgs are covering this yet?

Fox probably will. But don't count on anybody else even whispering about it.

Conventional wisdom in the mainstream media is that France, in their resistance to the US "warmongering", is standing on the high ground of principle. That France is really all alone in their pig-headedness and that Chirac might have motive more corrupt than pure would be, ah, "inconvenient".

61 posted on 02/19/2003 6:28:25 PM PST by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
Thanks for the ping, knighthawk.

Very interesting, to say the least!

62 posted on 02/19/2003 6:39:21 PM PST by dixiechick2000 (I heart "New" Europe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: dixiechick2000
Good post, this needs to be seen by the FR night readers.

bump
63 posted on 02/19/2003 7:38:40 PM PST by Ethyl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Ethyl
Bump it to the top. Those that work and didn't hear Rush need to know...........
64 posted on 02/19/2003 7:44:09 PM PST by Ethyl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Ethyl
You are right. Great post!

Bump for the night crowd!

65 posted on 02/19/2003 7:48:36 PM PST by dixiechick2000 (I heart "New" Europe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Ethyl
A welcome to Free Republic bump!;o)
66 posted on 02/19/2003 7:49:51 PM PST by dixiechick2000 (I heart "New" Europe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: dixiechick2000
We have got to keep this up, I haven't seen it on the latest posts yet...........BUMPER CROP
67 posted on 02/19/2003 7:51:21 PM PST by Ethyl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Ethyl
Everybody needs to see this, Come on Dixiechick2000 let's do it.
68 posted on 02/19/2003 7:53:02 PM PST by Ethyl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Ethyl
I've got to go, but I can give it one more BTTT!
69 posted on 02/19/2003 7:58:40 PM PST by dixiechick2000 (I heart "New" Europe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: dixiechick2000
Thank you for the welcome, Been a lurker for 8 years. How do we get this to the top?
70 posted on 02/19/2003 8:00:49 PM PST by Ethyl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Celtjew Libertarian
"Whatever personal chemistry there might have been between the two leaders obviously remained in place a decade later"

What a revealing article! This bit is what sealed the idea about their 'relationship' for me. Why would someone use the word 'chemistry' if they are just buddies? You don't see this kind of rheotoric used when writers talk about Bush and Blair.

71 posted on 02/19/2003 8:15:17 PM PST by BossLady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
Strange /sarcasm...I was listening to NPR today at work and they didn't mention anything about this.
Someone said Rush was talking about it. If this is true(and I have no reason to doubt it) it would go a long way toward explaining why the french are acting the way they are.
follow the money follow the money follow the money
72 posted on 02/19/2003 8:33:39 PM PST by Valin (Age and Deceit, beat youth and skill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Paul_B
Chirac is covering for Saddam because he doesnt want the Bghdad files revealing how close he has been to this regime .... he better hope we bomb thei Govt ministry buildings thoroughly and burn the papers totally.
73 posted on 02/19/2003 9:00:17 PM PST by WOSG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
"In 1981, the Israelis destroyed the Iraqi reactor in an air attack. There were rumors - which were denied -- that the French government was offering to rebuild the reactor. In August 1987, French satirical and muckraking magazine, "Le Canard Enchaine" published excerpts of a letter from Chirac to Hussein -- dated June 24, 1987, and hand-delivered by Trade Minister Michel Noir -- which the magazine claimed indicated that he was negotiating to rebuild the Iraqi reactor. The letter says nothing about nuclear reactors, but it does say that Chirac hopes for an agreement "on the negotiation which you know about," and it speaks of the "cooperation launched more than 12 years ago under our personal joint initiative, in this capital district for the sovereignty, independence and security of your country." In the letter, Chirac also, once again, referred to Hussein as "my dear friend."

"Chirac and the government confirmed that the letter was genuine. They denied that it referred to rebuilding a nuclear reactor.

"Only two possible conclusions can be drawn from this letter: Chirac either was trying, in the midst of the Iran-Iraq war and after his denial of involvement in the first place, to rebuild Iraq's nuclear capability, or he wasn't. And if he wasn't, what was he doing that required such complex language, clearly intended for deniability if revealed? No ordinary state-to-state relationship would require a combination of affection, recollection of long history and promise for the future without mentioning the subject. If we concede to Chirac that it had nothing to do with nuclear reactors, then the mystery actually deepens."

Worth repeating.

74 posted on 02/19/2003 9:14:03 PM PST by Victoria Delsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Axion
bttt
75 posted on 02/19/2003 10:26:09 PM PST by ellery
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ethyl
"Thank you for the welcome, Been a lurker for 8 years. How do we get this to the top?"

LOL I haven't been able to figure that one out since the forum changed! The only suggestion I have is to ping a lot of people.

Glad you finally decided to join. What took you so long?

76 posted on 02/19/2003 10:29:13 PM PST by dixiechick2000 (I heart "New" Europe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
Follow da oil too.
77 posted on 02/19/2003 10:44:11 PM PST by mafree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing; SJackson; madfly
Mega-France Crushing 'Year of the Frog' Ping! I heard Rush read this yesterday. Chirac is in trouble. France will be the laughingstock, much as we were under Clintoon.
78 posted on 02/20/2003 2:47:52 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (LIBERTY or DEATH!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: backhoe; Wallaby; Alamo-Girl
Major ping! Want to wipe some France off your shoe?
79 posted on 02/20/2003 2:52:04 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (LIBERTY or DEATH!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: michaelt
"I believe Rush just mentioned this."

Yes indeed! I hope that doesn't mean it should be buried. Heck, Rush often reports things that no one else bothers with. Remember his warnings about SUVs?
80 posted on 02/20/2003 2:57:26 AM PST by Arthur Wildfire! March (LIBERTY or DEATH!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
I guess my age is showing- I continue to be amazed at how dense people are about such things... fear & greed are basic human motivators-- another way to put that is "fear & money."

The fear factor is all those "unassimilated" Muslims France so foolishly allowed inside their borders- and who now constitute a guerilla army they have no hold over... and the money? Well, that's so obvious it needs no commentary...

81 posted on 02/20/2003 3:30:39 AM PST by backhoe (Has that "Clinton Legacy" made you feel safer yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
Hey, speaking of France. Look at what will be arriving at my mailbox by tomorrow or Monday at the latest, lol!...



Here is where I ordered that, btw...
82 posted on 02/20/2003 4:50:04 AM PST by MeekOneGOP (Bu-bye SADdam. You're soon to meet your buddy Stalin in Hades.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
Thanks for the ping. I suspect this won't be the last French embarassement.
83 posted on 02/20/2003 5:09:23 AM PST by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
bump
84 posted on 02/20/2003 6:48:49 AM PST by mountaineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
The Iraqis purchased a 70-megawatt reactor, along with six charges of 26 points of uranium enriched to 93 percent -- in other words, enough weapons-grade uranium to produce three to four nuclear devices.

So, being that a reactor holds only one charge at a time, and one may have been destroyed, where are the other 5 charges? Clearly enough for 3 nukes. This is pretty clear evidence that the media's statements that "Iraq has the equiptment and the know-how to make nukes but not the enriched uranium" are just to keep the sheeple sleeping. Here is clear evidence that Iraq bought weapons grade uranium from the French.

Earlier, when Giscard d’Estaing found out about the deal -- and particularly about the sale of 93 percent uranium -- he had ordered the French nuclear research facility at Saclay to develop an alternative that would take care of Iraq’s legitimate needs, but without supplying weapons-grade uranium. The product, called “caramel,” was only 3 percent enriched but entirely suitable to non-weapons needs. The French made the offer, which Iraq declined.

So the French went AHEAD with the deal?! There is a smoking gun, and it is French made, and the French cannot even deny they knew the uranium was for bombs not the reactor!!!

Obviously we knew about all this before Gulf one, my guess is that we have been hoping Sadam could restrain himself from using WMD against anybody except his own people. But the use of Anthrax inside Americas borders show that he is willing to use WMD against America.

The texican statement to this would be "draw pardner", cause this world is not big enough for the both of us...

85 posted on 02/20/2003 7:01:36 AM PST by American in Israel (Right beats wrong)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
bump to the top!
86 posted on 02/20/2003 12:16:42 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: surelyclintonsbaddream
Ping!
87 posted on 02/20/2003 1:55:25 PM PST by scott7278 (Peace had it's chance, now it's bombs away!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Howlin; Liz; Mudboy Slim
Info bump...
88 posted on 02/20/2003 5:58:06 PM PST by Libloather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-88 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson