[A-List] Fw: European Foundation Intelligence Digest Issue No. 164

["Christopher Black" <bar@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Euro Foundation" <euro.foundation@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Euro Foundation" <euro.foundation@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 7:12 AM
Subject: European Foundation Intelligence Digest Issue No. 164



European Foundation Intelligence Digest



Issue No. 164
3rd April 2003


I.  European reactions to the war


Things start to heat up in the coalition kitchen

As arguments start to break out in Washington about whom to blame for the
apparent failure of the war in Iraq - senior Republican Party officials have
been to see President Bush in an attempt to wean him off listening to advice
from Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz - the famous "coalition
of
the willing" of which the Bush administration has boasted seems to be coming
under stress.  Although President Bush was unable to name a single one of
the
countries in the coalition at a recent press conference, other US officials
have
variously put the number of countries participating or supporting the
British
and American troops in Iraq at 45, 49 or 50.  Several European countries
which
initially did support the war are now backtracking, Italy being the prime
example.  Although Silvio Berlusconi, the prime minister of Italy, signed
the
initial Letter of the Eight which ignited the row over "old" and "new
Europe",
he has been making himself scarce ever since.  Berlusconi hopes to become
president of the Republic and he knows how unpopular the war is in Italy.
Denmark, which signed up to giving military assistance to the coalition, was
forced to reduce its already tiny contingent under pressure from the
opposition.
The Netherlands, who gave broad support to the "coalition", have explicitly
ruled out any military support.  José-Maria Aznár, who has gone further than
any
other European state (apart from Britain) and has promised 9,000 Spanish
troops
for humanitarian work, has also come under immense pressure at home.  In
Poland,
photographs showing Polish soldiers posing next to American GIs have caused
a
strong public reaction against the war; there have been large anti-war
demonstrations in Warsaw.  Only 20% of Poles support their country's
participation in the war. The Polish Defence Minister, Jerzy Szmajdzinski,
said
that the timing of the attack had been "poorly chosen".  He said, "The way
this
operation is progressing is not a surprise because in our opinion, of the
General Staff and mine as well, the operation started very late or almost
too
late as far as climatic conditions are concerned."  The deputy chief of the
Polish General Staff, General Lech Konopka, said that the air raids carried
out
on Iraq had not brought about the expected results, and that reconnaissance
was
poor.  [Radio interview, 31st March 2003;  RFE Newsline, 1st April 2003] The
Czech Republic's new president, Václav Klaus, delivered a rebuke to the US
Secretary of State when he stated that the Czech Republic was not part of
the
"coalition", as the US government claims.  [Hospodarske Noviny, 21st March
2003]
Klaus, who had attacked the war only a few days after his election, said
that he
disagreed with the British and American view that it was right to remove an
undemocratic regime by force.  He said that the view that this could be done
seemed to him to be "from another universe".  [Mlada Fronta Dnes, 25th March
2003] Croatia was for a while considered part of the coalition because it
signed
the "Letter of the Vilnius 10", but its president, Stijepan Mesić, attacked
the
war as illegal once hostilities commenced.  He said that Croatia would never
support the war without a UN resolution and insisted that this position had
not
changed.  [Broadcast to the nation on Croatian TV, 21st March 2003;  Foreign
Press Bureau, Zagreb]  Slovenia was also one of the countries which signed
the
Letter of the Ten; its prime minister has, however, made it absolutely clear
that his country is not part of the coalition against Iraq.  [Office of the
prime minister, Statement, 27th March 2003;
http://www.gov.si/pv/index_eng.php]
Same thing in Ukraine, where the US ambassador said that Ukraine had
consented
to its name being used in a speech President Bush gave at the MacDill Air
Force
Base in Tampa, Florida, on 26th March.
[http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030326-4.html]  But the
spokesman for the Ukrainian foreign ministry, Mrakiyan Lubkivsky, said on
1st
April that his ministry had never asked the US to consider Ukraine a member
of
the "anti-Iraq coalition".  [Radio Free Europe Newsline, 1st April 2003]
Even
the Romanian president, Ion Iliescu, who has hitherto been one of the most
outspoken supporters of the UK and the US, has said that he was not ready to
follow the US under all conditions.  In Bulgaria, the Socialist opposition
has
launched a campaign against the war which has led to expressions of
different
opinions by the country's president and prime minister.  Romania and
Bulgaria
certainly have one eye on their admission to the EU in 2007, but they are
also
under pressure from their public opinions.  The majority in both countries
in
favour of an attack on Iraq has disappeared since hostilities commenced.
Now,
86% of Romanians and 71% of Bulgarians are opposed to the war and want it to
stop immediately.  The Hungarian government, which supports the US, has
refused
to close its embassy in Baghdad, as the Americans have requested, and the
Hungarian Foreign Minister has said that "Hungary is not at war with Iraq."
[Mirel Bran, Le Monde, 29th March 2003]  In the Romanian port of Constanţa,
where US forces are now based, feelings are also running high.  Locals have
been
quoted saying they are terrified of this "murderous" war and of terrorist
attacks in the city.  The mayor of the town, Diunu Traian, said that he
initially welcomed the American troops, but that he was shocked when he
learned
that the troops had signed a contract with a local construction company to
build
a road between the base and some military depots, without planning
permission.
When Romania agreed to all the US requests for bases, the State Department,
on
10th March, upgraded Romania to the status of "functioning market economy"
in
return, in contradiction to a similar report by the European Commission
published at the end of 2002.  Bucharest has also asked for the restitution
of
$1.7 billion in debt which Iraq had contracted with Romania in the 1980s
under
Ceauşescu.  Romania has also sent nearly 300 soldiers specialised in
chemical
weapons to the Gulf. [Mirel Bran, Le Monde, 2nd April 2003]



Schröder trims

In his first public statements since the beginning of the war, the German
Chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, has said that the EU's Common Foreign and
Security
Policy had been thrown into a deep crisis by the Iraq war.  He emphasised
that
it was essential that the United Kingdom, the USA's closest ally, have a
determining role in CFSP.  Schröder hinted that he thought CFSP should
counterbalance the USA when he said, "It would be fatal if this integrated
Europe, in the fact of new imbalances in the world, did not assume its
responsibilities."  These, he said, were in conflict prevention and peace
keeping, like the operation on Macedonia.  But he said that any integrated
EU
policy would have to "serve" Nato and the transatlantic relationship.  He
said
that without Britain this would be impossible.  [Die Welt, 3rd April 2003]
By
contrast, the (Social Democrat) president of Germany, Johannes Rau, has
delivered a scathing attack on George Bush and US policy.  He attacked
Bush's
invocation of God in justification of his attack on Iraq. "I don't believe
that
one people can get a message from God to free another people," he said.
"The
Bible was not a gun or a war directed at non-Christians, and the holy book
never
made mention of the crusades the U.S. president used to tout."  Rau went on,
"There are situations in which war is inevitable, but this was not the case
in
Iraq."  He attacked the US for dismissing the findings of the weapons
inspectors
that Iraq was co-operating, and also criticised the US from changing the war
aim
from disarmament to regime change.  "This contradictory situation only
exposes
an intentional desire to wage a military aggression against the Arab
country.
The U.S.  Administration turned a blind eye to the Arab-Israeli conflict, an
epidemic problem that needs an urgent solution, while preferring to launch
war
against Iraq."  [Interview, N-TV, 31st March 2003]



German opposition party comes under strain

A civil war has broken out in the ranks of the German opposition party, the
Christian Democratic Union/Christian Social Union.  The party leader, Angela
Merkel, has been outspoken in her support for the US position, which has
contrasted sharply with the popular anti-war position taken by Chancellor
Schröder.  Now, leading figures in the CDU have started to express their
disagreement with the party leader.  The prime minister of North-Rhine
Westphalia, Jürgen Rüttgers, emphasised that Mrs Merkel had never expressed
unconditional support for the USA; he added that, while it was important for
the
CDU to support the USA, the relationship with France was also key.  The
Secretary-General of the CDU, Laurenz Meyer, emphasised that it would be
wrong
to reproach the CDU leadership for "a strictly pro-American attitude".  The
former Foreign Policy spokesman of the CDU, Karl Lamers, attacked Merkel for
being uncritically pro-American.  Lamers said this was no way to exert
political
influence and he described it as "nonsense" to say that the Americans were
threatened by Iraq.  He added that the US wanted to create "a unipolar
hegemonial world order."  The more radical CSU deputy, Peter Gauweiler,
known
for making the occasional Eurosceptic remark, demanded a complete change in
his
party's stance on Iraq.  "This is not our war," he said.  He continued to
say
that his party's relationship with the USA should not be "an uncritical Yes
and
Amen."  He said CDU and CSU voters were horrified at the incompetence of the
American administration, and that the party faithful demanded an immediate
condemnation of the war.  [Arnhe Delfs, Die Welt, 1st April 2003]  Even the
party's most formidable politician, the Bavarian prime minister, Edmund
Stoiber,
has distanced himself from the hapless Merkel.  Speaking on a visit to
China,
Stoiber said, "The Allies will never be in a position to turn the military
process into something politically and economically positive."  He said that
he
regretted "most deeply" the fact that Iraq was being attacked without UN
approval.  Stoiber's statements have been contradictory in the past:
sometimes
he has attacked the US for going it alone, without the UN, and on other
occasions he has attacked Chancellor Schröder for not supporting the US and
for
splitting Europe.  [Andreas Lorenz, Der Spiegel, 31st March 2003]  However,
the
former Chancellor, Helmut Kohl, has leapt into the breach to defend Angela
Merkel, to express support for the USA, and to attack Gerhard Schröder as an
anti-American.  He criticised the government sharply for damaging relations
with
the USA but said that the German-American friendship would never be fully
destroyed, even if it would now need an entire parliament to rebuild it.  He
attacked the "unspeakable anti-Americanism of the Left" and said that
Johannes
Rau, Gerhard Schröder and Joschka Fischer were the most prominent
representatives of this anti-Americanism.  [Nikolaus Blome, Stephan
Haselberger,
Die Welt, 3rd April 2003]



One quarter of French people side with Iraq .

A poll has shown that 78% of French people oppose the attack on Iraq,
including
53% who oppose it "totally".   17% approve, with 5% don't knows.  Also
against
are 84% of people under 35, 90% of business executives, 83% of families with
income above 2,000 euros a month;  83% of Parisians; 87% of people with
university degrees (as against 61% of people without degrees); 85% of people
who
vote for the extreme left;  76% of those who vote for the main right-wing
parties.  Only 48% of those who vote for the extreme right are against, even
though Jean-Marie Le Pen was one of the first French politicians to condemn
the
Anglo-American aggression.  52% of those questioned said they would still
oppose
the war if Iraq used chemical or biological weapons against the invading
forces.
65% say the US is responsible for the conflict, against only 12% who blame
Iraq.
34% say they feel more on the side of the UK and US, while 25% say they
support
Iraq (30% for the under 35s).  43% say that a UK-US victory is "far from
obvious", against 33% who say it is "probable" and 21% "certain".  [Gérard
Courtois, Le Monde, 1st April 2003]



. but French government tries to mend fences

                The French prime minister has tried to pour oil on these
troubled waters.  Jean-Pierre Raffarin has called for "vigilance against all
manifestations of anti-Americanism" which, he said, were "unacceptable".
According to sources, the French government has been very careful in its
public
statements since the hostilities commenced, not wishing to be seen to treat
both
combatants as morally equal.  Raffarin said, "We side with democracy.  Just
because we are against the war does not mean that we wish the victory of
dictatorship against democracy."  He added, "The Americans are not our
enemies."
[Jean-Baptiste de Montvalon, Le Monde, 2nd April 2003]

            The same message was communicated indirectly by President Chirac
at
a lunch given for senators from his party.  The president of the Senate,
Christian Poncelet, said afterwards that the president had made it clear
that
"there is no doubt that the Americans are our allies and our friends".  "For
Jacques Chirac," others said, "the transatlantic bond cannot be questioned,
if
even France defends its vision of a multipolar world, in which the allies of
the
USA are partners and not vassals."  The president had said that he thought
the
Americans and the French were "in the same boat".  Chirac also said that,
while
he was concerned for the instability of the region, he was convinced that
the
USA would win the war.

            Alain Juppé, for his part, the former prime minister who is
considered by many to be the eminence grise of the Raffarin government, said
that the differences of opinion between France and America were very deep.
"France and a large part of the international community consider that we
must
make progress towards setting up a true world governance."  While some
pro-American members of the presidential majority in France want Jacques
Chirac
and the government to go further in clearing up the "confusions" which
remain
over the French position, commentators say that the indignant reactions of
the
Communist Party and the National Front to these latest statements show that
Paris is finally coming back into the American fold.  [Judith Waintraub, Le
Figaro, 3rd April 2003]




London and Paris try to make up


France and the United Kingdom have said that they want to "work closely
together" on Iraq when the war is over and that they are both committed to
giving the UN an important role after the conflict.  Tony Blair and Jacques
Chirac spoke on the telephone on 29th March.  London is evidently trying to
heal
the wounds created by the rift over the UN Security Council vote.  On 21st
March, Jacques Chirac made it clear that he would not allow "the British and
American belligerents" to take over for themselves the administration of
Iraq
after the war.  [Claire Tréan, Le Monde, 1st April 2003]




Blix says his work irritated the Americans


In an interview with Die Welt am Sonntag, the UN chief weapons inspector,
Hans
Blix, has attacked the US administration, saying that it was interested only
in
obtaining a UN resolution legitimising an attack on Iraq.  He said that the
Americans had not been interested in listening to objective information in
the
run-up to the war.  He said that the information given to him by the US
secret
services was "mediocre".  "Of all the sites to which we were sent for
inspection, only three of them had arms, and in none of those were there any
illegal weapons of mass destruction.  Now it will be interesting to see
whether
the Americans inspect sites about which they told us nothing.  I had the
impression that they had decided to attack and that our work irritated
them."
Blix added that the British and the Americans were now trying to recruit
British
and American members of his team to help them discover weapons.  He said
that
the discovery of gas masks was no proof that Iraq has chemical weapons.
Blix
said that Iraqi cooperation had been slow at first but that it had become
active
by the end of January.  On the day of the US ultimatum to Iraq, a letter had
arrived clarifying some of the last outstanding issues with the inspectors.
[Welt am Sonntag, 30th March 2003]




Russian defence minister attacks Iraq operation


The Russian defence minister, Sergei Ivanov, told Komsomolskaya Pravda on
31st
March that the Anglo-American attack on Iraq was not proceeding without
"mishaps
and miscalculations".  He said that Iraq had successfully challenged the
coalition both militarily and in terms of the propaganda war.  Ivanov added,
however, that Iraq would not be able to resist if the US resorted to
carpet-bombing, the political cost of which would be massive.  Ivanov said
that
if the US continued to minimise civilian casualties, then the operation
could be
problematic, since "Iraq still has a formidable army that has not yet begun
to
fight."



Commission condemns the killing of civilians

The European Commission has said that the killing by US soldiers of seven
women
and children was a "horrible and tragic incident".  The spokesman of the
Commission added that "It is not an isolated incident;  too many civilians
have
already lost their lives in this war.  This shows that however advanced the
technology is, there is no war without the loss of innocent lives."
[Libération,
1st April 2003]






II.  Other European News






One last push?


The Association of Sudeten Germans has decided to take the battle to the
enemy
by opening a permanent office in Prague, whose opening ceremony was attended
by
some 150 people including the Vice President of the Czech Senate, Jan Ruml.
The
Chairman of the Sudetendeutsche Landsmannschaft, the German MEP, Bernd
Posselt,
referred to the office as "an embassy" and the office's very existence has
created a sensation.  The Czech media and some politicians have called it "a
propaganda machine" designed as a provocation to the Czechs but Posselt said
that it was best if the outstanding issues between the Czech Republic and
the
Sudeten Germans were discussed.  Posselt recently voted in the European
parliament against the accession of the Czech Republic - which puts him in
the
odd position of being an "objective ally" of those Eurosceptic politicians
like
the European Foundation's own Jan Zahradil, who has strongly denounced the
opening of the Sudeten Germans' Prague office.   [Hans-Jörg Schmidt, Die
Welt,
26th March 2003]



German business confidence falls further

Economic experts in German banks and big companies expect growth to be 0.7%
in
2003, according to the quarterly survey by Reuters.  This is based on the
assumption that the Iraq war will not last longer than six or eight weeks.
Inflation is expected to be 1.4%.  The results of this latest survey are
even
more pessimistic than those of the last poll in January, when growth was
predicted at 0.9%.  The experts agree that the German economy is very nearly
in
recession and that they do not expect any turnaround until the summer.
Unemployment, currently heading towards 5 million, is not expected to start
falling until 2004, and even then only slowly.  Unemployment in Germany
currently stands at 10.5%.  [Handelsblatt, 1st April 2003]




EU takes over Macedonia


In a short ceremony on 31st March, the EU formally took over from Nato the
task
of maintaining the military force in Macedonia.  Now the EU has a little
colony
all of its own - just what it always wanted.  This is, of course, all part
of
the EU's "Common Foreign and Security Policy" of which there has been
precious
little sign in recent weeks. The EU mission has the appropriate name,
"Concordia" and is provisionally slated to last six months.  But we can be
confident that it will last indefinitely, since the original deployment two
years ago was supposed to last only 30 days.  The largest contingent among
the
350 soldiers is French but 12 other EU states are involved.  [Katja
Riddersbusch, Die Welt, 31st March 2003]










Published by The European Foundation, 62, Brompton Road, London SW3 1BW

Tel. + 44 20 7590 9901, fax 7590 9975, euro.foundation@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:euro.foundation@xxxxxxxxxx>

Attachment: Issue No. 164.doc
Description: Binary data