There's a fundamental split in the West now

eek. · Nov 5, 2004

OBL is gradually getting things his way.

It looks like different paths are going to be followed by the main Western powers over the next 4 years.

I can see France vetoing USA backed security council resolutions that aren't kosher.

It will be interesting to see if stuff like the UN and NATO survive as viable entities.

-------------------------------------------------------------

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=629 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD colSpan=3>Iraq overshadows EU summit

</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top width=416><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=203 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>

Mr Chirac says he is busy and will not attend the meeting

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>French President Jacques Chirac has decided to leave an EU summit just before a meeting with interim Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi.

Mr Allawi is due to join EU leaders as guest of honour at the summit lunch in the Belgian capital.

Mr Chirac, an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, said he had prior engagements and would not attend.

But he described French links with Iraqi officials as "excellent" and said he had never refused to meet Mr Allawi.

Meanwhile, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair has said some EU leaders are in a "state of denial" over President Bush's poll win.

He urged European leaders to accept President George Bush's re-election, in an interview with London's Times newspaper.

'Spectator countries'

Correspondents say Mr Chirac's move is seen as a clear snub to Mr Allawi, who has called for broader involvement in Iraq.

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=208 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=5>

</TD><TD class=sibtbg>

America has spoken. The rest of the world should listen

UK Prime Minister Tony Blair

Blair urges EU to accept Bush

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Mr Allawi has implored so-called "spectator countries" to become actively involved in the reconstruction of Iraq.

Dutch Foreign Minister Bernard Bot, whose country holds the rotating EU presidency, denied that there was any snub by President Chirac.

The French leader is to fly to the United Arab Emirates on Friday to express condolences over the death on Tuesday of its founding leader, Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan al-Nahyan.

"I think that what we should do is look towards the future, forget about the past," Mr Bot told reporters.

But the open split in EU ranks over the Iraq war risks being reopened on Friday, the BBC's European affairs correspondent William Horsley reports from Brussels.

The EU is due to approve a package of aid for training Iraqi election officials, lawyers and police, but it is worth only 30 million euros ($39m) - a small sum by Europe's standards.

Two more members of the US-led coalition in Iraq, the Netherlands and Hungary, this week announced plans to withdraw their troops quite soon after the Iraqi elections, planned for January.

Mr Allawi, on a European tour, made his plea for wider participation in his country after a meeting with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi in Rome on Thursday.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3984647.stm

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

xpanda · Nov 5, 2004

PM Paul Martin is said to be getting ready to propose a G-20 to replace Western dependence on the UN and to help Bush improve relations. However, since we have our own ongoing French/English relations issues (and the Bloc Quebecois hold a great deal of power to counter Martin's minority gov't) this ongoing rift between the US and France will be a difficult task to manage.

If Bush could learn some diplomacy it would help the situation.

PatPatriot · Nov 5, 2004

It will be interesting to see if stuff like the UN and NATO survive as viable entities.

The ONLY time they have been viable entities is when they they have been US lead!!...look it up!

xpanda · Nov 5, 2004

Patriot said:
The ONLY time they have been viable entities is when they they have been US lead!!...look it up!

The United Nations would be better off, and more efffective, if the Big Five were not on the Security Council.

I propose that we replace Russia, France, Britain, China and the US (ALL of whom have been aggressors in war at one time or another) with peaceable nations like Norway, Sweden, Canada, Finland and Greenland.

Unless and until the UN does away with the veto rule, and installs a one country/one vote system, the UN will always bow to the greatest power.

PatPatriot · Nov 5, 2004

They should close the god damn building down and let those countries sh!t for themselves....and save the US taxpayers money that the foreign phoney pygamies abuse when they are in this country.

Let them do their own heavy lifting for a huge change.Fxckin ingrates.

WildBill · Nov 5, 2004

Xpanda,

Greenland??? Too funny. Go look it up, they are controlled by Denmark. Nice try, but no one with any power in the world will listen to a group run by the non-powerful. I certainly don't buy into this Patriot thinking because the UN does great work in much of its duties, but of course there are messes and corruption just like any other government in the world. The fact is the UN overreaches in many cases.

We will never get the whole world to agree on a few touchy subjects, but that is no excuse to shut it down and let chaos, starvation, and war go unchecked. We should all just accept its limitations and stop expecting it to be able to solve all the problems out there.

PatPatriot · Nov 5, 2004

That organization contributes as much to terrorism as anything.For as much as what they do not do.

Its a corrupt horsesh!t debating society,that gives thugs and thieves prestige andwhos sole purpose is to bring down the US,or at least nuetralize it or bloodsuck it.

xpanda · Nov 5, 2004

WildBill said:
Xpanda,

Greenland??? Too funny. Go look it up, they are controlled by Denmark. Nice try, but no one with any power in the world will listen to a group run by the non-powerful. I certainly don't buy into this Patriot thinking because the UN does great work in much of its duties, but of course there are messes and corruption just like any other government in the world. The fact is the UN overreaches in many cases.

Tongue in cheek, my dear.

What I am tired of is Americans who say that the UN is irrelevant, when it is obvious that part of the reason why the UN's hands are tied is due to the veto rule, something the US has, something the US abuses (especially in the case of Israel) and something that we need to do away with. It seems that a "world government" is an abomination to Americans, unless it's controlled by them. Hypocrisy.

bblight · Nov 5, 2004

The UN is just a tool to aid in achieving the national interests of the powers, and as an aid to help second rate nations like France to be heard in the world arena. Generally speaking, it's nothing more than a debating society.

When the interests of the UN and the US do not coincide, then the US will do what it must!

The Euro's main power is that they can vote as a bloc, to protect European interests.

It should be remembered that many European interests run counter to the interests of the US.

Overall, the Euro's have no standing armies that they'd be willing to risk in a war that would not benefit them. Their borders aren't airtight and they have no oceans to act as barriers between themselves and terrorists. Appeasement is a policy that they can all agree will work ifor them in the short term.

For the US to maintain it's it's status as a military and economic superpower, it must ensure that the oil flows and that anyone who would disrupt the world marketplace will be quickly slapped down! They'll assuredly do what they have to with or without a UN sanction.