Such a Difficult Ally

Why Paris is so independent

To Americans--and indeed to many Europeans--the reaction was irritatingly familiar. French President Valery Giscard d'Estaing and West German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt issued a joint statement strongly condemning the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Three days later, Paris abruptly declared that it would not be represented at a German-sponsored meeting of Western European foreign ministers with Secretary of State Cyrus Vance in Bonn. Once again, France stood out as seemingly arrogant and as the ally least disposed to back Washington in an international crisis.

The French attitude revived memories of President Charles de Gaulle's haughty 1966 decision to pull French troops out of NATO'S integrated military command, and his persistent exclusion of Britain from the European Community. Why is it that France so often emerges as a difficult partner for the U.S. and NATO? TIME Paris Bureau Chief Henry Muller offers this analysis:

French diplomats take umbrage at accusations that they are soft on the Soviets. France, they point out, voted for the United Nations General Assembly resolution condemning the Afghanistan invasion. True, France has not followed the U.S. lead in imposing economic sanctions--though it pledged, along with other Community members, not to take advantage of opportunities created by the American grain embargo--nor has it backed the boycott of the Moscow Summer Olympics. The French explain that this is not because they disagree with the Carter Administration's actions but rather because European nations should use tactics better suited to them. "The West's diversity is its strength," says one Paris diplomat.

Beyond that, spokesmen for Giscard argue that France has followed a steadier course than the U.S. in its relations with the Soviet Union. They accuse the Carter Administration of vacillation and sending out conflicting signals--ranging from its early emphasis on human rights to last fall's "minicrisis" over Soviet troops in Cuba. No wonder, in the view of Paris, the Soviets got the impression that they could ride roughshod over the West. The French feel that Washington does not fully appreciate their efforts in seeking to contain Moscow-inspired expansionism in Africa, a role that has earned them the sobriquet "the West's Cubans." In Chad, Mauritania, Zaire and, last month in Tunisia, the French moved quickly to give military support to governments that were threatened by externally sponsored subversion.

Nonetheless, many Frenchmen have criticized President Giscard for being painfully slow to respond to events in Afghanistan. His first reaction, mumbled at a New Year's party for French reporters, was that the Soviet move may not have been "premeditated." Foreign Minister Jean Franc,ois-Poncet later tried to justify the equivocal French response by noting (incorrectly) that "France buys more oil from the Soviet Union than from Iran." Even the Giscard-Schmidt communique appeared indecisive to some. "It says to the Soviets, 'The next time you pull an Afghanistan you will be punished,' " complained Professor Alfred Grosser of the Institut d'Etudes Politiques. "That is the action of a weak parent."

Giscard's approach is a legacy of De Gaulle's efforts to devise an independent foreign policy that would give France a leading role to play on the world's diplomatic stage. As the proud fathers of detente--the concept, they say, was born during De Gaulle's 1966 state visit to Moscow when he declared that "the cold war period must be ended" --the French claim they have a particular responsibility to keep East-West tensions low. Western Europe is more vulnerable than the U.S.; the Soviet Union is hundreds, not thousands, of miles away. The French also have an economic stake in detente: last year trade between the two nations amounted to $3.7 billion. Yet too often France's search for independence translates as paranoia about seeming to take orders from Washington.

The French argue that their approach will produce better results than the hardline American stance. Insists one Paris official: "By imposing sanctions you've lost whatever leverage you had. You've written off Afghanistan, whereas we believe there's still a chance of getting the troops out." French diplomats feel that a modulated approach is necessary to keep the Third World out of Moscow's camp. Says one: "If you try to drag them into a strategy of tension, you'll get half of them on your side and the other half will tip the other way, thereby eliminating Moscow's diplomatic isolation."

Domestic political considerations play a part in Giscard's cautious attitude; he will be up for re-election in May 1981. Wary of accusations from his conservative rival, Paris Mayor Jacques Chirac, that he has abandoned the Gaullist tenets of independence in foreign policy, the President seemingly bends over backward to avoid leaving opponents any room for maneuvering. Such prudence may be excessive. The continued split between France's Communists and socialists, which was aggravated by Party Boss Georges Marchais's overt support for the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, makes Giscard perhaps the most comfortably ensconced political leader in the West.

The latest American-French rift, sadly enough, reopened old wounds that appeared to be healing. In contrast to his predecessors, Giscard has made a conscientious effort to defuse tensions between Paris and Washington. He has, for example, been far less critical of Carter's economic policies than Schmidt. French military officials now work more closely with their NATO counterparts than they have in years. The U.S. and France have also smoothly coordinated their efforts in Africa. American planes carried the French troops that helped put down the rebellion in Zaire's Shaba province in 1978. The trouble is, De Gaulle made the U.S. far more sensitive to criticism from France than from, say, West Germany. "It's too bad," says one American diplomat who knows Paris well. "We can use French advice, but this constant kibitzing just undermines their own influence on our policymaking."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.