Dans son intervention, M. Kouchner souligne particulièrement quatre points : le renouveau du multilatéralisme, le défi représenté par la Russie, le Moyen-orient où il est nécessaire que la prochaine administration agisse rapidement, l’Afghanistan où une stratégie globale doit être développée. Le chef de la diplomatie française a notamment insisté sur la nécessité de poursuivre la « double approche » de la question iranienne (négociations et sanctions) menée par les Européens depuis 2003, mettant ainsi implictement en garde Barack Obama contre un dialogue précipité.
Voici de larges extraits du texte de Bernard Kouchner tel qu’il l’a prononcé en anglais :
Obama : une chance historique
The President elected last week is the first, and perhaps the last one, who will have a chance to shape, with the rest of the world, and particularly with Europe, the global agenda, together, in a spirit of shared responsibility.
(...) Why the last ? Because I do not think that in four or eight years time, we will, you and us, be able to shape the international agenda by ourselves. I’m not interested in lamenting the decline of the West, I’must stating a simple fact, but a key fact. The balance of power is shifting rapidly from West to East, from North to South, from the national to the local, and the global. Globalization means we are no longer alone. The others count, from Astana to Beirut, from Ouagadougou to Pristina.
(...) Just a little over a week ago I hosted my 26 colleagues, along with Javier Solana, High Representative, and Benita Ferrero-Waldner, Commissioner for External Relations, in Marseilles. Together, we agreed on the basis of a French proposal, on a toolbox containing what the European Union could offer the next administration, what it expected from it, and, most importantly, what it hoped we could achieve together. Let me share with you the core of our thinking. We jointly identified four key sets of challenges. They are not the only ones and they are not the only ones that we face today, but they are one of the ones that will determine the shape of tomorrow’s world.
1.Réinventer le multilatéralisme
First challenge, reinventing an effective multilateralism. I already mentioned this, we should start with the reform of the Bretton Woods system and the establishment of an effective and fair system of global economic governance. I know this is an immense hope. The obvious need to enhance cooperation in the economic and financial field, within the International Monetary Fund in particular, must act as a catalyst for the other necessary reforms : in the United Nations, in the G8, we need to give the new-comers the place they deserve. But as I said, this is just not about formats, it’s also about rules and mindset.
The institutions that we created in the middle of the last century are just not adapted to the complexity of the next century. And the powers that are emerging either are not part of these institutions or, when they are, prove less and less willing to constrain their sovereignty.
(...) And this is true whether we are talking global hunger, global health, climate change, non-proliferation, human rights, of course, energy policy, crisis management, or the responsibility to protect. And there is a real regression in the responsibility to protect. This last subject is difficult to summarize, but it is essential, and it will take a long time for the international experts and several G20 — or other formats — meetings. This is a task for the new administration, and for Europe and Asia. We were very impressed at the Europe-Asia Summit in Beijing, by the will of our Asian colleagues.
I’m not naïve. Multilateralism is not a panacea. Just because an action is legal and legitimate doesn’t mean that it will be successful.
(...) More effective institutions must help us shape the agenda, and not just react to it. But that does not mean we do not have to deal with the pressing issues of the day. I see three, in particular : relations with Russia, the Middle East writ large, and Afghanistan/Pakistan.
2.Le défi de la Russie
Russia is a challenge to us. It may be seen today as part of the problem, but we must not forget that there is no solution to most of today’s problems without it, let alone against it. In the past year, Russia has oscillated between cooperation and provocation. It has offered to negotiate a treaty redesigning the security architecture of the continent, while violating internationally recognized borders for the first time since the Cold war. It has asked for a stronger partnership with the EU and offered contributions to the EU military mission in Chad, while threatening to target European capitals with nuclear missiles, and now to base missiles in Kaliningrad. It has voted all 5 Security Council resolutions against Tehran, while selling sophisticated weaponry to Iran… I could continue. Some may attribute such behavior simply to cynicism, or hypocrisy. But, even if this was true – and nothing is simple in Russia – it would be beside the point.
The key question, for the European Union and for the United States (but we, Europeans, are neighbors of the Russians), is how we can create the conditions for a true partnership with Moscow. In the short term, this means getting Russia to understand that playing power politics will backfire. In the medium and long term, such a policy requires a stronger investment on our part :
- Through and in the economy. We must encourage Russia to sign up to predictable and stable rules. The aim is Russia’s accession to the WTO, the OECD and the IEA and the realization of a single area of economic cooperation between the European Union and Russia. It is our goal.
- In the field of European security. Faced with current uncertainties as regards the CFE Treaty, Europeans and Americans must get Russia to respect its commitments towards the Treaty. But it is also in their interests to closely examine and respond to the Medvedev proposals on Security. When Russia flexes its muscles and speaks to us with Cold war accents, the smartest thing to do is to come up with a new form of dialogue. Reaffirming our red lines, in particular with regard to human rights, the rule of law or the territorial integrity of sovereign States. But trying to show Russia, at each step, the advantage of foregoing a sterile confrontation. This was our approach when we decided at the meeting of the 27 foreign ministers that I chaired on Monday, in advance of Friday’s EU - Russia Summit, that negotiations on the Framework Agreement with Russia could go forward. And 26 out of 27 states were in agreement.
In the Georgian crisis, our ability to respond rapidly, and to remain united, both among Europeans and within the Alliance, was a key asset. We must do whatever it takes to maintain it.
3.Proche-Orient : oser la paix
One of the areas where Russia has continued to cooperate is the Middle East. I have just returned from Sharm El Sheikh, where we had a meeting of the Quartet. My message to this administration is simple : continue working the peace process with the same determination as if you had four years ahead of you. My message to the next administration is just as simple : start working the issue from day one as if you only had a few weeks left. Every day wasted reinforces the extremists, not those who work toward peace. Europe’s message is straightforward : dare peace !
We know the broad parameters of a final settlement – and we have known them at least since Taba. Today, we must join forces to fulfill three urgent tasks :
- Contribute to a viable Palestinian state with strong institutions that respect the rule of law.
- Second, push for a genuine freeze on all settlement activity, as set out in the roadmap. Settlements are one of the biggest roadblocks on the path to peace.
- Make more room for the Arab peace initiative, while we encourage inter-Palestinian reconciliation.
I know that the peace process is central in the minds of Arab public opinions. But it is not the single key to solving the other problems of the region.
We must seize the moment and respond to positive developments in Syria and Lebanon. A converging European and American attitude could help Syria realize that it has more to gain frombreaking with its past — above all in terms of its support for terrorism, of course — and getting closer to us than from continuing its current relationship with Iran.
Iraq. I do not need to make the case in Washington that it is in our common interest to do what it takes to ensure Iraq’s success. I had good talks with Gen. Petraeus on my last trip to Baghdad. I will continue, however, making the case in Europe, and in France. Iraq is starting to stabilize and rebuild itself. It must take on its full role in the region and affirm its independence and sovereignty. In the future, Iraq can embody something unique in a conflict-ridden Middle East : a democratic country where Shias, Sunnis and Christians, Arabs and Kurds, can co-exist. Even if the road is still long, and the relations between communities are still difficult at this point. This is a dream, but it must be our common dream.
Iran : sanctions et négociations
The dark cloud looming over the whole region and beyond is Iran. Not just Iran’s support for terrorism ; not just its missile program, which is rapidly progressing ; not just the vile statements of its leadership regarding Israel. Iran’s current progress toward a nuclear weapon capability is the most serious threat to the international non-proliferation system and to the security of the region. Europeans cannot make effective multilateralism their motto and accept Iran’s uranium enrichment, in continued defiance of the IAEA and the United Nations Security Council.
That is why we took the initiative to act on this crisis in 2003. Behind the UK, Germany and France, Europeans took a united stand. And we stuck to it, despite opposition from many quarters. We were railed by the U.S. administration for being weak-kneed, for “talking to the enemy”. We remained firm, and were able to rally the support of the United States in 2005 and then of Russia and China in 2006 on a dual-track approach (sanctions and negotiations). And last summer, the U.S. participated in E3+3 talks with Iran in Geneva. Today, I hear some voices, even in this town, saying that we have failed, that we must prepare for an Iranian bomb – or for a military intervention. I could not disagree more.
Our current approach has not yet succeeded, Iran is continuing enrichment, yes, I know, but it has certainly not failed. Iran’s increasingly disastrous economic situation will only become worse because of falling oil prices. The impact of sanctions will continue to grow. And the time will come when the leadership is faced with a clear choice : open negotiations, with all the promise they contain, including assistance on a civilian nuclear program – to which Iran is entitled once it has come clean – or stand ready to pay a price too steep to sustain.
Until substantive dialogue is engaged with Tehran and so long as it refuses to suspend sensitive nuclear activities, we should increase the pressure on the Iranian government. But this is not contradictory with openness to dialogue, and obstinacy in trying to launch such a dialogue. I personally have spared no effort toward this goal.
Unfortunately, Iran has not yet replied with anything other than delaying tactics. Today, the United States holds a key card in its hand : the prospect of dialogue opening a perspective for normalization. Depending on how and when this card is played, Washington can either help unlock the current stalemate, or doom the dual-track process, by convincing once and for all the Iranian regime that its perceived position of strength allows it to just continue playing for time. Neither Europe nor France has ever said that there must be no dialogue with Iran. But this dialogue must be meaningful.
The next administration will wish to take a new look at the whole issue. That is normal, given its importance. I know that the Europeans are often seen as “donneurs de leçons”, or giving lessons. But the stakes are just too high to ignore what we have to say. If we want toensure that a possible US-Iran dialogue moves us closer to our shared goal, and not further away from it, we must continue to work together. I was very encouraged by the discussion that then-candidate Barack Obama, Nicolas Sarkozy and I had in Paris last summer.
4.Poursuivre l’effort en Afghanistan et au Pakistan
Let me turn to the last major challenge we are facing : Afghanistan and Pakistan.
European determination to sustain and increase its effort, in the civil and military fields, for as long as necessary to succeed, is crucial.
I reaffirm it here today. I know that there are several reviews underway in Washington. However, success is less a matter of redefining our objectives than of ensuring full implementation of those already set out at the Bucharest NATO Summit last April and the Paris Afghanistan Support Conference last June. In both instances, we underlined that the solution cannot be only military. In American, you say “you can’t kill or capture your way out”. That is why I said “succeed”, not “win”. We are not at war with the Afghan people, we are on their side.
Our overriding objective remains the exercise by the legitimate Afghan authorities of their full responsibilities, beginning with security. That is the desired end-state. And I said end-state not end-date. We will remain present as long as necessary. But our action must be guided by the objective of full “Afghanization”, which will allow us to leave the moment that Afghan authorities are fully in charge, and in a position to remain so.
This means consolidating our military presence and strengthening our assistance to the Afghan National Army ; assisting central and local government by reinforcing their credibility in the field of governance, for example through support in the field of police. The European police mission got off to a very bad start. Under the French presidency of the EU, we have decided to double its numbers, to broaden its mandate, and to change its leadership. “Business as usual” is not an option.
To achieve all of these goals, and to ensure their coherence, our support to Kai Eide, the UN Secretary General’s Special Representative, must be unflagging. President Karzai has been busy these last few weeks, both domestically and internationally. We support the political initiatives that he has undertaken, whether internationally or locally, to move towards an Afghanistan that is reconciled with itself. Peeling off Afghan Talibans who are pursuing an essentially national agenda from Al-Qaeda jihadists for whom Afghanistan is just another front in the global war against “the infidels” is politically difficult and morally tricky.
But, ultimately, I believe reconciliation with those who give up violence and accept the Afghan constitution will be part of the solution. It will be up to the Afghan authorities to navigate this difficult process.
Neighboring countries also have a key role to play for the security and stability of Afghanistan. A truly comprehensive approach must be a regional approach. This is why I have offered to host a meeting on regional cooperation, with my Afghan counterpart and Kei Eide, in Paris next month.
The country that counts most in the neighborhood is of course Pakistan. The internal situation is worrisome, especially on the economic front – and we must support it economically. But there is some good news regarding relations with Afghanistan, since the election of President Zardari, and the arrival of new heads of the military and intelligence. There seems to finally be a realization that there can be no stability in Pakistan while Afghanistan is at war, and Afghanistan will remain at war as long as the Afghan insurgents continue to receive outside support. Deeds must now match words.
Une nouvelle ère transatlantique
Ladies and Gentlemen, Commentators point out that the next American President will inherit two wars, the worst economic crisis in a century, and a continued threat from global terrorism. That is true, but it is only part of the story. First because he will not inherit them by himself : whether Europeans like it or not, we will share with you failure and success alike. This is why we must pool our energies, our resources, our imagination, to act together in our shared interests. Second because in this ordeal he will also inherit a unique resource : hope, optimism, goodwill, from the world over, and in particular from Europe. I trust he will know how to turn these expectations from a burden into a treasure.
And the “toolbox” whose substance I have summarized for you, on behalf of 500 million citizens from 27 European nations, is an illustration of this extended hand.
Europeans and Americans have moved to a more mature stage in their relationship. One where you know what phone number to call when you need to speak to Europe, despite Henry Kissinger’s remark, and, once in force, the Lisbon Treaty will make it even easier. One where we can jointly define the agenda, and not just share the bill. One where we can handle disagreements. One where we can build unity out of diversity, within Europe, across the Atlantic and in reaching out toward the rest of the world. One where our partnership is a partnership of choice, and not of necessity.
Thank you very much.
