Täiendava elluviimise eest pressitakse lisahüvesid. Normaalsetes lepingusuhetes lõpevad läbirääkimised lepingu allkirjastamisel. Venemaaga läbirääkimised alles siis algavadki. Nii on see alati olnud ja nii ka jääb.

The French, you see, don't really pronounce an "h" at the beginning of a word. That's why my French teacher found it easier to convey his lunch order by requesting "sheeseburgers" than he did in trying to explain what he meant by an "amburger."

French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, on the other hand, has weightier things in mind when he speaks - Iran's nuclear program, for instance - so his elocution is of greater consequence. In speaking with the daily newspaper Ha'aretz, Kouchner was quoted as downplaying the threat of an Iranian nuclear weapon by saying, "I honestly don't believe that it will give any immunity to Iran... because you will eat them before" they can launch a missile.

Now, Israelis are fairly adventurous, culinarily speaking, and Persian dishes are nothing new on the local scene. But the suggestion that we'd gorge ourselves on Iranians is especially laughable in consideration of the fact that Kouchner meant that Israel would likely hit Iran, as in a pre-emptive strike. The online version of the interview omits the quote as it appeared in print. But as this gaffe makes its own headlines, Ha'aretz (A'aretz?) will be eating crow. Zut alors!

Rarement un chef de l'État ne s'était posé avec autant de force en défenseur de la presse écrite payante d'opinion. C'est peu dire que cet exercice inédit provient d'un homme qui entretient des rapports complexes, fascinés et opportunistes, avec les médias. Une "gouvernance médiatique" analyse le sociologue Daniel Muzet et, selon Patrick Bartement, directeur général de l'OJD, " en 2007, il y a eu 252 couvertures sur l'univers Sarkozy... qui a fait vendre 110 millions d'exemplaires de plus qu'en 2006."

Cette excellente connaissance du monde médiatique, le président de la République la doit d'abord à ses amitiés avec la quasi totalité des grands patrons de presse : Martin Bouygues (TF1, parrain de son plus jeune fils), Arnaud Lagardère (Hachette, le Monde interactif, ancien patron de toutes les publications du sud-est dont La Provence, Var, Nice et Corse Matin, "un frère"), Vincent Bolloré (Direct 8, celui du yacht prêté après l'élection présidentielle), Bernard Arnaud (les Echos), Nicolas Beytout, la liste est longue...

Les accusations d'interventionnisme aussi, aux limites d'une démocratie dont les fondements demeurent la séparation des pouvoirs, notamment le quatrième, celui d'informer librement. Et les soupçons s'accumulent : empêcher la publication d'un article du JDD (Journal du dimanche) sur le non-vote de Cécilia au second tour de la présidentielle, la mise à l'écart d'Alain Genestar de Paris-Match pour avoir publié les photos de ladite Cécilia aux bras de son "compagnon" Richard Attias, le départ de PPDA du 20h qui refusait l'arrivée à la direction de l'information de TF1 de Nicolas Beytout - "l'ami du Figaro" - après avoir mal digéré celle de Laurent Solly, ex-directeur adjoint de campagne du candidat Sarkozy... Et puis la nomination de Christine Ockrent, épouse de son ministre des affaires étrangères, Bernard Kouchner, à la direction générale de France Monde, et puis, et puis...

Pas de quoi initier des états généraux de la presse sous les meilleurs auspices. Il y a, dans cette initiative, comme un goût de suspicion sur l'un des sujets qui préoccupe le plus un chef de L'État, névrotiquement obsessionnel sur ces questions. Ne préjugeons pas néanmoins de la qualité des 4 groupes de réflexion mis en place avec des professionnels hautement estimables.

Plus localement en revanche, on fait moins dans la dentelle. Et les tendances nationales semble prendre chez nous, à Marseille, des tournures digne du raffinement de nos gouailleuses poissonnières du Vieux Port. La chose pourrait-être sympathique si elle n'était pas grave. Jamais, en effet, Marseille n'avait vécu un tel bouleversement dans le contrôle et la gestion de l'information par un pouvoir à l'agonie.

Nous soulignions, ici-même, durant les municipales, combien le rachat du quotidien La Provence par le groupe Hersant s'était presque passé dans le bureau du maire de Marseille. Combien aussi La Chaîne Marseille (LCM) se devait d'être aux ordres de l'Hôtel de ville. Et voilà que la chasse aux sorcières a commencé, comme jamais Marseille ne l'a vécue. La saison des transferts à l'Olympique de Marseille a sûrement donné des idées. Récit local.

Marseille, un tsunami journalistique...
Juillet 2008, c'est par un communiqué cinglant que le Syndicat national des journalistes (SNJ) de La Provence est monté au créneau. Soulignant «l'interventionnisme du P. d-g», le syndicat majoritaire estime à propos de la réorganisation en cours, marquée par une quarantaine de démissions de journalistes ou photographes qui ont fait valoir la clause de conscience et de cession (article L.761-7 du Code du travail), par conséquent quitté l’entreprise ou sont en passe de le faire. En "fait de mise en marche, il s'agit plutôt d'une mise au pas de la rédaction». Pour le SNJ, «la pluralité et l'indépendance de la rédaction (sont) mises à mal.»

Depuis son rachat en début d'année par le Groupe Hersant Media (GHM), la tension était perceptible dans la rédaction. Si la crise de l'immobilier servait de prétexte officiel aux soucis financiers du quotidien régional (moins d'achat d'espaces publicitaires), il ne faisait aucun doute pour tous les observateurs que la baisse conjointe des ventes et des recettes publicitaires -moins 20%- avaient des causes... Plus politiques.

En pleine élection municipale, la nouvelle gouvernance du quotidien avait été mise au jus très vite. Il fallait sauver le soldat Gaudin, coûte que coûte, l'Elysée contrôlait l'affaire de près. Le cédant (Lagardère) et l'acquéreur (le groupe Hersant, détenu par Dassaut communication) étaient des amis intimes du président. La deuxième ville de France ne pouvait tomber sans écorner directement l'aura de Nicolas sarkozy. De fait, les informations publiables émanaient du cabinet municipal en place.

Si quelques journalistes tentaient de faire leur boulot correctement, non sans mal, la ligne éditoriale et les angles des articles publiés avaient suscité l'ire du candidat Jean-Noël Guérini. Ce dernier estimait que la couverture journalistique de sa campagne était loin d'être objective. On ne pourrait l'en blâmer tant nous avions stigmatisé ici-même, jour après jour, l'évidence.

Plus encore, bien des oreilles marseillaises avaient entendu les propos peu amènes de Didier Pillet, tout nouveau P.d-g de La Provence à l'encontre du candidat de gauche. Sûrement la faute d'un "bleu bite", très éloigné des réalités politiques locales, lors d'un déjeuner mondain avec madame le Maire d'Aix-en-Provence, Maryse Joissains-Masini, le 18 juin : " Je vais débarrasser Marseille du petit Corse !". Les protagonistes ont nié.

La victoire de Guérini aux cantonales, augmentant encore sa majorité au riche, très riche, Conseil général des Bouches-du-Rhône, a tôt fait de voir fondre l'une des principales sources de publicité locale. Une faute grave dont la publication aura bien du mal a se remettre. Sortir du bois aussi vite était idiot. Démontrer l'évidente bêtise n'a pour prix que l'irrespect. Fieffé patron...

Au-delà des anecdotes, les faits s'enchaînent. S'en suit un tsunami journalistico-politique. La fuite des plumes. Celles qui intègrent désormais les cabinets politiques, de gauche s'entend. Il faudra bien, un jour, oser la question : pourquoi ? Bien sûr que lesdites plumes doivent faire vivre leur famille, bien sûr qu'elles pensent garder leur indépendance morale. Bien sûr que tout se comprend avec de la compassion.  Pourtant, il reste en mémoire les maîtres du journalisme qui préféraient l'indépendance à la soupe. Quel qu'en soit le prix, si douloureux soit-il, un sacerdoce, une source d'initiatives bénéfiques. Michel-Philippe Baret, chef du service politique, a été l'un des premiers à partir, en juin dernier, pour rejoindre le cabinet du Président de la Région PACA, Michel Vauzelle.

A Aix, l'historique Hervé Nédelec a fait valoir lui aussi sa clause de cession et a quitté le quotidien. Il a choisi l'université Paul Cézanne en prenant la direction de l'Isim, l'Institut Supérieur de l'Information et des Médias.

A Marseille, après la mise au placard des deux journalistes en charge du suivi politique des municipales, Laurent Léonard et Christine François-Kirsch, tous deux soupçonnés d'avoir été trop indulgents à l'égard du candidat socialiste, le service politique de La Provence a, bien entendu, été remodelé. Prennent le relai un ancien de Marseille l'Hebdo , Philippe Faner, et un ancien du service culture, François Tonneau. La fidèle Marjory Chouraqui et l'énigmatique Florent Provansal composent aussi la base de la nouvelle équipe chargée de veiller à la ligne éditoriale fixée par ledit sieur Pillet.

La mutation forcée de Marseille l'Hedbo
L'Hebdomadaire était sur la sellette depuis le changement de propriétaire de La Provence, dont l'hebdo est une filiale. Ce n'est pas un secret que d'affirmer combien l'ambiance entre l'hebdomadaire et le quotidien était détestable, bien avant les échéances électorales. Le David voulant jalousement garder son indépendance face à un Goliath hyper puissant, lui reprochant, paradoxalement, son manque de promotion dans les colonnes du quotidien.

Mêmes causes, mêmes effets. Jean-Michel Gardanne et Gilles Rof, les responsables de la rédaction, l'ont quittée. Le premier a rejoint le cabinet du Président de la Communauté urbaine Marseille Provence Métropole, Eugène Caselli, au titre de conseiller spécial à la communication, Gilles Rof a, quant à lui, préféré se tourner vers la production de documentaires.

Après moult tergiversations, il s'agissait d'anesthésier ces quelques journalistes trop libres, disons trop indépendants. Il convenait donc de transformer le titre. Les cabinets conseils ont été mis à rude épreuve : un supplément féminin, culturel ?  Le choix est fait et cette semaine, vous pourrez acheter une nouvelle version du titre... La politique en est bannie, bien sûr ! L'hebdomadaire va être "recentré sur l’économie, l’art et l’art de vivre avec une équipe composée de quatre rédacteurs, un secrétaire de rédaction et un chef de service" d'après le P. d-g de La Provence.  Ce dernier a nommé un nouveau "responsable" , Guilhem Ricavy, qui travaillait jusqu’alors au quotidien gratuit Marseille Plus, et l'a chargé début juillet de "présenter un nouveau projet". C'est fait. A l'heure de la crise financière internationale, vous pourrez, à tout le moins, vous passionner pour la décoration !

La plupart des journalistes qui ont travaillé pour le titre, nous les avons rencontré ces dernières semaines, ne mâchent pas leurs mots. Il s'agit bien d'une "volonté délibérée de faire taire un titre" dont le "ton libre et impertinent" a parfois gêné la municipalité.

Ils citent encore l'exemple précis de l'affaire des visages d'américains pendant les municipales. Explication. Jean-Claude Gaudin et ses colistiers apparaissaient en effet sur les affiches officielles entourés de toute une série d’hommes, de femmes et d’enfants… américains. Ces visages avaient été achetés sur le site d’une banque d’images américaine bien connue, Getty Images. L'information, révélée par Marseille l’Hebdo pendant la campagne, a été largement reprise par les médias nationaux, dont Canal +. Impardonnable, de quoi tuer la publication. Ainsi fait...

LCM, La Chaine Marseille n'échappe pas à la tourmente
Après la démission forcée du patron Pierre Boucaud, c'est l'ami fidèle de Jean-Claude Gaudin, Jean-Pierre Foucaud qui devient le P.d-g. Parachuté quelques mois plus tôt de la rédaction parisienne d'Europe 1, le directeur de l’information et des programmes, Donat Vidal-Revel, en est devenu directeur général délégué, sans trop connaitre ses attributions et sa marge de manœuvre. Puis, surprise, au cœur de l'été, il démissionne, dégouté, puis quitte Marseille pour rentrer à Paris. Là, il devient directeur général adjoint en charge de la rédaction de Radio Classique, trop heureux d'entrer dans le prestigieux Groupe LVMH. Ledit groupe, bien sûr, détenu par l'un des meilleurs amis du président de la République.

Pour LCM, la main mise de l'équipe UMP de la Mairie de Marseille ne peut se voir que si l'on observe avec attention le conseil d'administration. Le 2 juin 2008, c'est l'ancien directeur de la communication de la Mairie, Guy Philip, actuel directeur général du Groupe Hersant Media dans le sud, qui est désigné par le groupe La Provence comme représentant permanent.

Autre personnalité cooptée le 18 décembre 2007, Jean Ticory, Directeur des investissements et des participations de la Caisse d'Epargne Provence-Alpes-Corse, proche de Charles Milhaud (ex président du directoire de la Caisse d'Epargne et conseiller municipal UMP depuis le 16 mars dernier) et de Guy Teissier, Maire des 9° et 10° arrondissements de Marseille, entre autre président de la commission de la Défense de l'Assemblée Nationale.

Tout ce monde se connait bien, s'aime bien et défend les intérêts de ses amis.

Pour compléter le tout, le directeur régional de France3-Méditerranée, Didier Grillon, vient de prendre, il y a quelques jours, ses nouvelles fonctions comme Directeur général de LCM. Ce dernier semble occuper aussi le poste de directeur de l'information, au grand désespoir des deux jeunes (mais efficaces) responsables de l'information et des programmes respectivement : Anne-Sophie Maxime et Damien Nicolini. Les remuants journalistes Florent Bonnard et Yann Dieuaide sont eux nommés Chef d'édition afin de les responsabiliser. Aucune surprise depuis, les reportages du journal télévisé ressemblent comme une goutte d'eau à l'illustration des pages de La Provence. Une rumeur laisse même entendre que la rédaction de LCM pourrait déménager au 248, avenue Roger Salengro, siège de La Provence. A suivre...

Jamais, disions-nous, Marseille n'avait vécu de tels chambardements en matière d'information, sans que quiconque, au fond, ne s'en émeuve. Une vraie république bananière... Le tout est passé presque discrètement.

Ici, la presse est désormais muselée. Reste la très pauvre et peu lue Marseillaise, victime des incroyables et suicidaires choix des derniers apparatchicks communistes en place. Les journalistes galeux ne sont plus là, les poils à gratter ont été aspirés et les francs tireurs écartés. Sur le net, d'autres tentent l'aventure de la presse alternative de manière un peu poussive, il faut bien l'admettre. Pour l'heure...

French FM Bernard Kouchner almost got Israel into some serious trouble yesterday, when he misspoke and said Israel would "eat" Iran. Reuters reports:

"I honestly don't believe that it will give any immunity to Iran ... because you will eat them before," Kouchner was quoted by Israel's Haaretz newspaper as saying in an interview about the possibility of Tehran gaining a nuclear weapon.

But the French Foreign Ministry issued a brief statement later saying Koucher had said 'hit' -- meaning carrying out a surgical pre-emptive strike -- rather than 'eat'.

We all know that native French speakers often drop the H from English words. A little more prudence on the part of Kouchner and Ha'aretz wouldn't have been so hard, though, right? It seems like a silly mistake to make when tensions between Israel and Iran are so high.

Reuters, at least, had the wit to remind us of "Allo Allo," a British sitcom whose humor relied almost singularly on French mispronunciation (see video above).

You can find Kouchner's Ha'aretz interview, corrected, here.

—Benjamin Schuman-Stoler

Bref, Bernard Kouchner doit lui aussi revoir son accent anglais. Parce que lorsque le journal israélien Haaretz comprend qu'Israël veut manger l'Iran (eat) au lieu de frapper l'Iran (hit), l'incident diplomatique est du format maousse costo. Tout cela pour dire au fond qu'Israël ne doit faire ni l'un ni l'autre, même si certains estiment que la guerre irano-israélienne a déjà commencé et que la guerre au Liban était en fait une première guerre entre les deux pays.

Toujours est-il que certains se demandent encore l'utilité de la linguistique. Voilà que pour des histoires d'h pas assez aspiré et de /i/ pas assez allongé, la linguistique sème la confusion dans la politique internationale. L'attitude de Kouchner, en colère contre les inaptitudes phonétiques des journalistes d'Haaretz me semblent toutefois faire méchamment honneur à la réputation cocardière des nos chers voisins. Ne lui viendrait-il pas plutôt à l'idée de présenter ses excuses pour son épouvantable prononciation dans la langue de Shakespeare?

Attribuer la faute aux autres plutôt que de l'assumer, plus généralement, me semble être un sport dans le monde politico-économique qui ruine toute crédibilité. Déjà que le pape est censé être infaillible, voilà que le monde politique et le monde des affaires n'est plus censé faire d'erreurs. Alors même que l'on professe à nos enfants que l'erreur est humaine etc. etc.

Cela me semble être un reflet de la personnalisation de l'erreur. Lorsqu'il y a une faute, on cherche la tête qui en est responsable et on la coupe. Au Japon, la première question n'est pas "qui a fait ça?", mais "comment y remédier ?". Cette philosophie, cette sagesse même, me plaît infiniment plus.

Van Breukelen

• Crédit photo: fablibre sous licence Creative Commons

]]> http://5pillar.wordpress.com/?p=8183 Sun, 05 Oct 2008 21:33:29 +0000 5-Pillar Scribe http://5pillar.wordpress.com/2008/10/05/israel-will-strike-before-iran-gets-bomb-french-fm/ In an interview with Haaretz published on Sunday, Kouchner, who is on a visit to Israel, said he agreed with expert estimates that Iran needed from two to four years to create a nuclear bomb.

"I think that you are well informed, and so are the Americans and so are we. It has always been the case between two and four years. But to make what? One bomb," Haaretz quoted Kouchner as saying.

...And we should trust this kind of speculation without fact because...?  There are just as many other experts that say Iran has no desire for the bomb.  You could get just as many, if not more countries, to agree that the U.S. and Israel are in cahoots to take over the world.  But this doesn't make it so.  Does it?  Maybe you don't want to answer that question.

Even if it were factual, Iran would have gone through far more hurdles than Israel cares to admit to -- and Israel has the bomb.

“The current situation is bad. The security situation is getting worse. So is corruption and the Government has lost all trust. Our public statements should not delude us over the fact that the insurrection, while incapable of winning a military victory, nevertheless has the capacity to make life increasingly difficult, including in the capital.

“The presence — especially the military presence — of the coalition is part of the problem, not the solution. The foreign forces are ensuring the survival of a regime which would collapse without them. In doing so, they are slowing down and complicating an eventual exit from the crisis (which, moreover, will probably be dramatic)."  >>>>>

As my regular readers will observe I am not only taking a Russia-friendly approach on my blogs but I am posting articles which are actively calling for the European Union to build and strengthen a rapport with the Russian Federation as a friend and partner of the EU.

Ex-chancellor Gerhardt Schroeder is right to see Russia's destiny to be with the European Union. Moreover, I would like to see the Russian Federation join the EU but recognise that to be a pipe-dream, at least for now. Firstly, the EU would feel threatened by the prospect of its huge neighbour swamping the rest and secondly, the US would never allow such a threat to its global, imperial pretensions to materialise.

The present danger that we face in Europe is not from Russia but from the continued trouble-making instigated by self-serving neocons ensconced in the White House and their errand-boys in Downing Street and the east European EU. These fifth-columnists are on the payroll of US imperialism and have no wish to see a united Europe developing a foreign policy independently of the US. They would rather that the EU take on a 'Euro-Atlantic' role together with Washington's cat's paw, NATO, under US global military-economic hegemony.

Any sane person would see that such an arrangement, the present status quo, not only results in the destabilising of European security --as we have seen recently result in the Caucasus-- but that it puts Europe under the constant threat of regional war exacerbated and provoked by US interference. Saakashvili is not the only madman to have wheedled his way into power in eastern Europe. There are other narrow-minded fanatics and opportunists, for example in Poland, the Czech Republic and the Ukraine, who would be more than willing to do the bidding of neocon bosses in the USA to bring destruction upon the heads of Europeans.

Some of us remember how the US planned its nuclear strategy in the 'eighties to include a European Theatre of War, meaning a 'limited' nuclear exchange with the old Soviet Union to include Europe and not the north American continent. That threat led to the growth of a huge Peace Movement in Europe and an equal loss of US popularity. It is ironic that the US appears to be free now to develop its First Strike nuclear doctrine of 'Compellance' with the installation of the ABM missile shield (more of that anon) with no such resistance from Europeans.

The ABM shield is certainly not popular either amongst the people of Poland or the Czech Republic where public opinion is simply being ignored by opportunist, pro-US governments. While crowing about the need for representative democracy amongst others, the Atlanticists' own record in that concern is, to say the least, deplorable. While ruthless imperialism by war criminals is ok for the Good Guys of the West where Might is Right the slightest sign of the East's approaching western atrocities is noisily denounced. It's all rather yawningly tiresome.

At least one Russian strategist is warning us that the conflict in the Caucasus is by no means over and that the mischief-makers in Washington DC will now be looking to cause a bigger crisis in the Ukraine which could lead to civil war and a confrontation between Russia and the West. As well as that, the ongoing threat of a surprise attack by the US proxy, Israel, with or without support from the US military during the time prior to the November presidential election, puts us all on a Red Alert.

The need for a collective, friendly European initiative towards Russia is now needed urgently. As France's Foreign Minister, Bernard Kouchner, is reported to have said the other day in respect of our need to build a common alliance with Russia:

"We have to be together. The US have their own views, but we are living close to Russia. We need to develop our own policy, a neighbouring policy. We have to talk about our views of being close to Russia, a great country, a partner."

Kouchner, of course, is absolutely right. It's not surrender-monkey talk but that of the pragmatic, classic diplomacy for which while France is traditionally famed is anathema to the fanatics who still rule the dual-party, opposame dictatorship in the USA. Kouchner, all credit to him, speaks as a European, unlike the traitorous Brown and Miliband who will happily sell out the interests of their own people in order to ensure a continued political sodomy by their American minders.

It's time to cut the crap and deal with matters of survival. The hour is already very, very late. Homegrown Europhobes who continue to bleat about a 'fascist EU state' are their and our worst enemy. For all their talk about a loss of 'sovereign' powers the reality is that they would rather Britain forsake its European partners to continue as a vassal state of Washington DC, serving the warmongering interests of the notorious Anglo-American fraternities responsible for the deaths of 70 million Europeans in two world wars.

So which is it to be, fellow Britons? Will you, as Europeans, choose a common destiny where Europe and Russia coexist together in peace or are you prepared, through inaction, to allow your quisling leaders continue with a diabolical 'special relationship' which has caused so much bloodshed and misery on this war-torn Planet? The time to decide has come and the time for dithering is ended.

Which is it to be?

Rory Winter, New Civilization

When I was at university, there used to be a game, still popular around the world today, called Diplomacy. The players each represented one of the major European nations as they existed about one hundred years ago: France, Britain, Germany, Italy, Russia and so forth; their mythical armies and fleets (no aeroplanes then) battled for territory and power on a large board representing the map of Europe and the seas around it.

The game was known as Diplomacy because, as it is difficult to attack and to defend oneself at the same time and as a single country did not necessarily have the force by itself to overcome an opponent, the object was to arrange strategic alliances and non-aggression pacts with other players while bluffing about your true intentions.

It was, however, a time consuming game. Even in the real world, diplomacy is a task that requires a slow and steady hand. Besides, the game could only really be played effectively if discussions could be clandestine. Diplomacy by megaphone, though fashionable, is counterproductive

What used to strike me as significant, however, was the characteristics of the nation being played did not reflect, as they would in any other game, the characteristics of the player. Rather it seemed that whoever played Russia, for example, or Britain, would always end up playing that country in the same way.

What is true in a game, I suspect, holds no less true in real life. Unlike that of most of its neighbours, Russian foreign policy has not changed significantly in 300 years, despite cataclysmic changes of regime. It would be naive of us therefore if we were to pretend that Russian foreign policy is likely to change now, rooted as it is in the country's geography and history.

I am sure that President Sarkozy of France, as president of the European Council, will bear this in mind as he steps on to the Moscow tarmac on Monday accompanied by Mr Barroso and Mr Solana, to discuss with Mr Putin and President Medvedev how best we move on from the Georgian imbroglio.

For, in a sense, Europe has been caught facing two ways. Ostensibly it has broken off the current round of partnership talks with Russia, designed to set a new framework for co-operation, until the Russians withdraw their troops, now occupying parts of Georgia, to the positions they held on 7 August.

Yet it is hard to see Monday's Kremlin talks other than as a re-invigorated attempt to find a secure basis for just such a partnership. If agreement can be reached on Georgia on the basis of some mutual understanding how much easier will be be to extend the same understanding to other issues? One does wonder, however, how much is likely to be achieved in a single short day. Given the importance and intractability of the issues, more time is surely needed for something worthwhile. 'Trop de zèle,' as Talleyrand might have sighed.

But whatever the length, it is surely important that we on the European side understand Russia's legitimate fears and aspirations which, of course, extend far beyond the Caucasus. These have been well rehearsed in the press - not least in an excellent analysis by Jan Oberg in these pages last week. Of course, to understand does not necessarily mean to agree, still less to cave in.

But by understanding the Russian position - including why so many actions taken, semi-innocently, by the West are seen as provocative and threatening by Moscow - we shall be better able to reach a positive conclusion rather than a conversation that remains a dialogue of the deaf, which is what occurs when politicians posture and issue empty threats.

We in Europe need also to understand (and with a degree of humility) how our own actions, over Kosovo in particular, are seen by Russia. It is no use saying, as French foreign minister Bernard Kouchner does, that Kosovo is 'unique.' Everywhere is 'unique' in that sense, including Georgia. As a reason for transgressing international law, uniqueness is worthless.

We Europeans like to pat ourselves on the back and tell the world how we have replaced 'war' with 'law.' We pride ourselves on our adherence to the principle of a rules-based international order, but we omit to add the rider - "when this suits us," as it didn't, as it happened, in Kosovo. That the United States has an even stronger stake in this hypocritical position should not cloud our judgement.

We accepted that international law should be broken when first we bombed Kosovo and Serbia and then again when a majority of member states recognised Kosovo's illegal independence. A number of European states also joined the equally illegal and ill-fated crusade into Iraq. With such stains on our collective conscience, it ill behoves us to lecture Russia about adhering to international law; we are both tarred with the same delinquent brush.

Yet once we accept this - admit that we have no moral superiority here - we can sit down on an equal basis with Russia and talk about how it would be in the interests of both parties to see a future in which we both, really and truly, abide by international law.

Heaven knows we need a stable and effective partnership with Russia - and not just to run our own inter-bloc relations - but for the wider world as well. Europe needs Russian help in the Security Council on issues such as Iran, militant Islam, the Middle East, climate change, nuclear proliferation and so forth.

This does not mean abandoning the Caucasus, still less backing down from fierce criticism of Russia's record on human rights and democracy. But it does mean ceasing to treat Russia as though she were simply a blank space on the map.

The issues at stake are complex. They include trade, security, energy, democracy all the way from the Arctic to the Black Sea. They will take time to resolve. We must be prepared for give and take. Russia is not the old Soviet Union bent on ideological domination by force. We can deal rationally with modern Russia.

Talk of a new cold war is simply short-sighted.

We both need a rules-based world. And we both need to help each other stick by those rules. Russia is better an ally than a foe.

EU Foreign Ministers are calling for an international inquest into identifying who was responsible for starting the conflict in South Ossetia.

They made the statement in the French city of Avignon, where they have gathered for an informal meeting.

The ministers said the EU needed to re-evaluate its foreign policy, particularly in relation to Washington. French FM Bernard Kouchner said U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney was not America’s best ambassador

"The very fact that Americans didn't find anything else to support their failed ally - Mr. Saakashvili - other than sending Mr. Cheney to the region, who is incredibly unpopular in the world, who is associated with the war in Iraq, with all these neo-conservative, black-and-white visions of the world, who was accused of corruption - remember the Halliburton affair in Iraq. And if they wanted, if the Bush administration really wanted to consolidate the international community behind the United States in criticising Russia, I think they should find somebody else and not send Mr. Cheney," Kouchner said.

He also said the European Union should develop a joint approach to Russia.

"We have to be together. The U.S. have their own views, but we are living close to Russia. We need to develop our own policy, a neighbouring policy. We have to talk about our views of being close to Russia, a great country, a partner," he said.

The ministers are also debating when and under what terms civilian monitors will be sent to Georgia. EU is about to send 700 observers to the region.

A discussion on delivering humanitarian aid and restoring Georgia’s economy is also on the agenda.

The meeting comes just four days after an emergency summit in Brussels, at which EU leaders denounced Russia's recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

To watch the full press-conference of French FM, Bernard Kouchner, and other EU foreign ministers, please follow link.

International parliamentarians visit South Ossetia

Meanwhile, an international parliamentary delegation is already in South Ossetia. The main goal of the trip is to clarify the sequence of recent events in the region.

The group consists of members of parliament and public representatives from several European and CIS countries.

They will be joined by a delegation from Russia.

The officials will meet local residents, before heading to the neighbouring republic of North Ossetia, which hosted large numbers of refugees after the conflict.

La summitul de criza convocat pentru 1 septembrie de presedintia franceza a Consiliului UE, "Cei 27" ar putea lua totodata in calcul si masura interzicerii acordarii de vize pentru oficialii din Abhazia si Osetia de Sud, cele doua regiuni separatiste georgiene a caror independenta a fost recunoscuta in aceasta saptamana de Rusia, spre profunda indignare a europenilor.
Totusi, reprezentantii guvernelor UE si diplomatii de la Bruxelles sustin ca Summitul nu va aproba introducerea unor sanctiuni mai dure la adresa Rusiei, cum ar fi suspendarea acordului de parteneriat incheiat cu Moscova in 1997 sau punerea sub interdictie a investitiilor imobiliare rusesti in Europa.
Ministrul francez de externe, Bernard Kouchner, a declarat ca Parisul nu propune introducerea de sanctiuni, dar a adaugat: 'In mod cert, acestea vor fi sugerate. Anumite state membre au solicitat deja impunerea de sanctiuni'.

Wahrlich ein hohes Ziel.

Unia Europejska nie nałoży w poniedziałek na szczycie w Brukseli sankcji na Rosję w odpowiedzi na konflikt gruzińsko-rosyjski - poinformowało dziś źródło w Pałacu Elizejskim.

Putin blames US for Georgia role

Mr Putin said US citizens were in the area during the conflict

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has accused the US of provoking the conflict in Georgia, possibly for domestic election purposes.

Mr Putin told CNN US citizens were "in the area" during the conflict over South Ossetia and were "taking direct orders from their leaders".

He said his defense officials had told him the provocation was to benefit one of the US presidential candidates.

The White House dismissed the allegations as "not rational".

Georgia tried to retake the Russian-backed separatist region of South Ossetia this month by force after a series of clashes.

Russian forces subsequently launched a counter-attack and the conflict ended with the ejection of Georgian troops from both South Ossetia and another rebel region, Abkhazia, and an EU-brokered ceasefire.

Diplomatic wrangling

Mr Putin said in the interview: "The fact is that US citizens were indeed in the area in conflict during the hostilities.

"It should be admitted that they would do so only following direct orders from their leaders."

Those claims first and foremost are patently false, but it also sounds like his defence officials who said they believed this to be true are giving him really bad advice Dana Perino, White House spokeswoman

Mr Putin added: "The American side in effect armed and trained the Georgian army.

"Why... seek a difficult compromise solution in the peacekeeping process? It is easier to arm one of the sides and provoke it into killing another side. And the job is done.

"The suspicion arises that someone in the United States especially created this conflict with the aim of making the situation more tense and creating a competitive advantage for one of the candidates fighting for the post of US president."

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino rejected the allegation.

"To suggest that the United States orchestrated this on behalf of a political candidate - it sounds not rational," she said.

"Those claims first and foremost are patently false, but it also sounds like his defense officials who said they believed this to be true are giving him really bad advice."

SOUTH OSSETIA & ABKHAZIA South Ossetia Population: About 70,000 (before recent conflict) Capital: Tskhinvali President: Eduard Kokoity Abkhazia Population: About 250,000 (2003) Capital: Sukhumi President: Sergei Bagapsh

Diplomatic wrangling over Russia's actions in Georgia continued on Thursday with the Georgian parliament urging its government to cut diplomatic ties with Moscow.

Earlier, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner suggested some EU countries were considering sanctions against Russia.

Mr Kouchner insisted France had made no proposals for sanctions itself but, as current president of the EU, would aim to get consensus among all 27 countries of the bloc if sanctions were envisaged.

France has called an emergency EU summit on Monday to reassess relations with Russia.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov described talk of sanctions as the working of "a sick imagination".

Such talk was an emotional response that demonstrated Western confusion over the situation, he said.

The US has said it is now considering scrapping a US-Russia civilian nuclear co-operation pact in response to the conflict.

"I don't think there's anything to announce yet, but I know that that is under discussion," Mr Perino said.

The White House has also announced that up to $5.75m (£3.1m) will be freed to help Georgia meet "unexpected and urgent refugee and migration needs".

Rocket test

Earlier on Thursday Russia failed to get strong backing from its Asian allies over the Georgia conflict.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), comprising Russia, China and Central Asian nations, met in Dushanbe, Tajikistan, and spoke of its deep concern.

The group did not follow Russia in recognising the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev insisted he had the backing of the nations over Moscow's actions.

Amid the rising tension, Russia announced on Thursday it had successfully tested its long-range Topol ballistic missile from a launch site in Kamchatka in the far east of the country.

Russia says the rocket is capable of penetrating the proposed US missile defence.

El 31 de agosto el mandato de las Fuerzas Interinas de las Naciones Unidas concluye. Un borrador de la resolución francesa para renovar su mandato fue enviado el miércoles y en el principio el Consejo de Seguridad lo aprobará sin pegas. La fuerza de 13.000 soldados ha mantenido la zona sur del Río Litani libre de cualquier actividad armada visible de Hizbulá y ha ayudado a las Fuerzas Armadas Libanesas (FAL) a establecerse por si mismas por primera vez en treinta años. 

Hay 1.125 soldados españoles que incluyen 78 mujeres y 175 soldados no españoles de Latinoamérica y Guinea Ecuatorial. El contingente español que vino a Líbano en septiembre de 2006, está destacado en el sector oriental en la parte más al sur del país. Junto con España, Nepal, India, China e Indonesia también tienen tropas desplegadas en esa zona del país. El área cubierta por las tropas españolas incluye una población compuesta mayoritariamente por chiítas pero también drusos, cristianos y suníes musulmanes. La relación entre las tropas españolas y la población local es muy apreciada por la mayor parte de la gente. 

En las últimas semanas, tanto libaneses como israelíes han criticado a la FINUL por fracasar al llevar acabo su misión. Los libaneses echaron la culpa a la FINUL por fracasar en la retirada israelí de la sección norte del pueblo de Ghajar, ocupado por éstos, o de parar los vuelos diarios israelíes sobre Líbano. El gobierno israelí acusa a la FINUL de fracasar a la hora de terminar con el contrabando de armas a Hizbulá en las zonas bajo control. 

El 22 de agosto, el primer ministro libanés, Fuad Siniora, envió una carta de queja al Secretario General de las Naciones Unidas acerca de la necesidad de proteger la soberanía e integridad de Líbano después de las amenazas contra Líbano, por parte de líderes israelíes,  como el primer ministro Ehud Olmert y el Ministro de Defensa Ehud Barak. 

El 19 de agosto, Olmert había dicho que Israel levantaría cualquier limitación sobre operaciones militares en el caso de que Líbano se convirtiera en lo que denominó como un estado de Hizbulá. El primer ministro israelí dijo que durante el la guerra del verano de 2006, Israel se limitó en su guerra contra Hizbulá con el fin de no provocar numerosas víctimas entre la población civil. Ahora que Hizbulá esta representado en el gobierno libanés, Israel no se siente bajo la obligación de respetar dicha limitación.

Es su mensaje a las Naciones Unidas Siniora escribió: "Como sabe las amenazas de fuerza resultan una grave violación de las leyes internacionales, la Carta de las Naciones Unidas y el espíritu de la Resolución 1701 del Consejo de Seguridad. Las actuales violaciones de Israel de la Resolución 1701, además de las repetidas amenazas de usar fuerza amarmamentística  contra Líbano despiertan serias preocupaciones acerca de las intenciones de Israel."

La FINUL se ha convertido en un rehén del rifi rafe que está pasando entre Líbano e Israel. A pesar de las acusaciones y contra acusaciones, la FINUL sigue siendo una importante presencia estabilizadora en el Sur de Líbano, especialmente los vigilantes para la paz de las Naciones Unidas que incluyen una numerosa presencia de soldados europeos de Francia, Italia y España. Ni Israel ni Hizbulá tienen interés en alienar a las potencias europeas con su guerra de palabras.

 En el trascurso de su actual visita a Siria y Líbano, se publicó que el Ministro de Asuntos Exteriores francés Bernard Koushner ha dicho que las amenazas de Israel contra Líbano no deberían ser tomadas en serio ya que representan maniobras políticas a la vista de las próximas elecciones del mes que viene dentro del partido gobernante Kadima en Israel. 

Otra interesante novedad relacionada con Líbano concierne sus fronteras con Siria. Un grupo de trabajo nombrado por Ban Ki-moon ha enviado recientemente un informe criticando tanto a Siria como a Líbano por no hacer lo suficiente para parar el flujo de armas de Irán a través de Siria destinadas para Hizbulá. La Resolución 1701 del Consejo de Seguridad impuso un embargo del envío de armas después de la guerra del verano de 2006 entre Hizbulá e Israel. Por cierto, los israelíes ser refieren a esa guerra como la "Segunda Guerra del Líbano" (la primera guerra importante fue en 1982), mientras Hizbulá la llama "Promesa Veraz." 

Permitidme una pequeña puesta al día acerca de los seis soldados españoles asesinados el año pasado en un ataque terrorista. Los informes de Beirut mencionan que los principales sospechosos son los militantes islamistas suníes inspirados por al Qaeda, no por Hizbulá. Hizbulá ha estado colaborando muy de cerca con la actual investigación hispano libanesa para encontrar a los responsables de la muerte de los valientes soldados españoles. 

En este punto del juego entre Israel y Líbano no predigo ningún cambio en el actual estatus quo. En el caso de que el actual comandante italiano de la FINUL, el General de División Claudio Graziano, no renueve su mandato hasta finales de 2009, se supone que será un español quien lo reemplace. Para entonces, el contingente español debería haberse hecho muy familiar con el mundo bizantino de las políticas libanesa e israelí, y habrá ganado el apoyo y el respeto absolutos de la población local en el sur de Líbano.

http://www.un.org/spanish/Depts/dpko/unifil/index.html

UNIFIL: BETWEEN LEBANON AND ISRAEL

On August 31 the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) mandate expires. A French draft resolution was submitted Wednesday to renew its mandate and the Security Council is supposed to approve it without any hitches. The 13,000-strong force has kept the area south of the Litani River free of any visible armed Hezbollah activity and helped the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) establish itself there for the first time in thirty years. 

There are 1125 Spanish soldiers that include 78 women and 175 non-Spanish soldiers from Latin America and Equatorial Guinea. The Spanish contingent, which came to Lebanon in September 2006, is deployed in the Eastern sector in the southernmost part of the country. Together with Spain, Nepal, India, China and Indonesia have also troops deployed in that part of the country. The area covered by the Spanish troops includes a population made up mainly of Shiites but also Druze, Christians and Sunni Muslims. The relationship between the Spanish troops and the local population is highly appreciated by most of the people. 

In the last few weeks, both Lebanese and Israelis have criticized UNIFIL for failing to accomplish its mission. The Lebanese blame UNIFIL for failing to secure an Israeli withdrawal from the northern section of the Israeli-occupied village of Ghajar or stop daily Israeli flights over Lebanon. The Israeli government accuses UNIFIL for failing to halt the smuggling of weapons to Hezbollah in the areas under its control. 

On August 22, Fuad Siniora, the Lebanese Prime Minister, sent a letter of complaint to the U.N. Secretary-General bringing to his attention the necessity of protecting Lebanon's sovereignty and integrity following threats against Lebanon made by Israeli leaders such as Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak. 

On August 19, Olmert had said Israel would lift any limitations on military operations should Lebanon turn into what he termed a Hezbollah state. The Israeli prime minister said that during the summer 2006 war Israel used restraint in its war against Hezbollah in order not to provoke heavy casualties among the civilian population. Now that Hezbollah is part and parcel of the Lebanese government Israel does not feel obliged to abide by this restraint. 

In his message to the U.N. Siniora wrote:" As you know threats to resort to force are a grave violation of international law, the U.N. Charter and the spirit of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701. Israel's current violations of Resolution 1701 in addition to repeated threats to use armed force against Lebanon raise serious concerns about Israel's intentions." 

UNIFIL has become hostage to the tit-for-tat going on between Lebanon and Israel. Notwithstanding accusations and counter-accusations UNIFIL is still an important stabilizing presence in South Lebanon especially since the U.N. peacekeepers include a large presence of European soldiers from France, Italy and Spain. Neither Israel nor Hezbollah have an interest in alienating European powers in their war of words.

 In the course of his current visit to Syria and Lebanon, French Foreign Minister Bernard Koushner was reported saying that Israeli threats against Lebanon should not be taken seriously as they are the political posturing in preparation for next month's elections within the ruling Kadima party in Israel. 

Another interesting development related to Lebanon includes its borders with Syria. A task force appointed by Ban Ki-moon has recently submitted a report criticizing both Syria and Lebanon for not doing enough to stop the flow of weapons from Iran through Syria to Hezbollah. U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701 imposed an embargo on shipments of weapons following the end of the summer 2006 war between Hezbollah and Israel. For the record the Israelis termed that war the "Second Lebanon War" (the first major war was in 1982) while Hezbollah called it "Truthful Promise." 

Allow me a small update here regarding the six Spanish soldiers who were killed last year by a terrorist attack. Reports from Beirut mention that the main suspects are Sunni Islamist militants inspired by al Qaeda, not Hezbollah. Hezbollah has been collaborating very closely with the ongoing joint Spanish-Lebanese investigation to find those who were responsible for the death of the valiant Spanish soldiers. 

At this stage of the never-ending chess game between Israel and Lebanon I do not foresee any change in the current status quo. In the event of the current Italian UNIFIL commander Major General Claudio Graziano not renewing his mandate as far as the end of 2009, a Spaniard is supposed to replace him. By then, the Spanish contingent would have become very familiar with the Byzantine world of Lebanese and Israeli politics and gained the total support and respect of the local population in South Lebanon. 

http://www.un.org/depts/dpko/missions/unifil/

Kouchner, whose government currently holds the European Union's rotating presidency, arrived in Damascus after talks in Beirut earlier in the day with Lebanese President Michel Sleiman and other officials. >>>>>