With the American invasion of Iraq in 2003, French-American relations reached a low point. The Bush administration felt betrayed by French diplomatic tactics at the United Nations, while French President Jacques Chirac felt confirmed in his mistrust of the sole superpower and his call for a multipolar world. Today, on the eve of the French presidential elections, opinion polls show that three-quarters of French voters believe that France should distance itself from the United States. Despite a long history of alliance dating back to the American Revolution and including two world wars, France has always had a somewhat ambivalent attitude toward the US, and the Iraq war was not the first time that a controversial security policy undercut America’s attractiveness in France. Polls show similar reactions after the Suez Crisis of 1956, the Vietnam war in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and the deployment of intermediate range missiles in Europe in the early 1980s. In addition, France has long had a strand of cultural anti-Americanism. Some conservatives disliked the crude egalitarianism of American culture, while some on the left saw America’s faith in markets as a symbol of capitalist exploitation of the working class. After World War II, France banned Coca-Cola for a time, and, more recently, the farmer Jose Bove became a folk hero by destroying a McDonald’s restaurant. But the French still flock to McDonald’s and to theatres playing American movies, despite limits on their import. While such ambivalence will not change, French-American relations are likely to improve no matter which of the three leading candidates prevails in the final round of voting on May 6, in part owing to Chirac’s exit. In fact, French-American relations have already begun to improve, as both sides realized that their pubic dispute was damaging their interests. The exit of some of the most strident neoconservatives in the Bush administration over the past year has also helped, and with growing opposition to the Iraq war, some Americans are beginning to think that the French may have had a point after all. Of the three major candidates, the conservative Nicolas Sarkozy has expressed the most pro-American views and traveled to Washington for a photo opportunity with Bush. He told a Washington audience that anti-Americanism was an elite indulgence not shared by the French at large. “The truth is that the French listen to Madonna, just as they used to love listening to Elvis and Sinatra, Sarkozy said. “And all French parents dream of sending their child to an American university. According to Sarkozy, “The virulence of the press and a portion of French elites against the United States reflects a certain envy of your brilliant success. In response, an advisor to the Socialist Party’s candidate Segolene Royal labeled Sarkozy “an American neoconservative with a French passport. But while Royal has been careful to placate her socialist base, she has also talked about the need for market reforms in the French economy, and taken some foreign policy positions on Iran and Turkey that are closer to the American view than are Sarkozy’s. The centrist candidate, former education minister François Bayrou, for his part, has relatives in the US and has called for a “third way in French politics analogous to the paths forged by Bill Clinton and Tony Blair. The candidates differ in other ways as well. Both Sarkozy and Royal have appealed to nationalism. Sarkozy has boasted that he expelled tens of thousands of illegal immigrants when he was interior minister, and in 2005 he referred to Muslim rioters in the suburbs as “scum. Aware of the ultra-nationalist threat from Jean-Marie Le Pen, who took second place in the 2002 presidential election, Sarkozy has said that he wants “to talk to those who have moved toward the far right because they are suffering. While Royal has been critical of Sarkozy, she, too, has appealed to nationalism, calling for a “reconquest of the symbols of the nation from the right. Only Bayrou has denounced the “nationalistic obsession that has marked the campaign. But one should not read too much into these differences. All three candidates support Chirac’s opposition to the Iraq war, will protect French agriculture in global trade negotiations, and will promote French leadership in Europe. Despite French voters’ rejection of a constitution for the European Union in 2005 (in part a protest vote against Chirac), all three candidates recognize that the EU has been an important means to enhance French power in world affairs. None is likely to become an American poodle. Indeed, that is not the way French politics works. French leaders often like to be seen resisting American pressure before striking a compromise and cooperating in a manner that serves both French and American interests. Friction with the US is thus inevitable, but in the long run there is usually fruitful cooperation. Despite the tension of the past few years, Europe and America have cooperated in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Lebanon, and Iran, and on countering Al-Qaeda. Whatever the outcome of the French election, French-American relations are likely to remain on a steady course, and may well improve further after the US presidential election in 2008. Joseph S. Nyeis a professor at Harvard University and author of “Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. THE DAILY STAR publishes this commentary in collaboration with Project Syndicate © (www.project-syndicate.org).
Franco-American ties will improve after the French vote
