Dr. Frank's What's-it

Lollygaggin' Here's Stephen H. Hayes's

Lollygaggin'

Here's Stephen H. Hayes's amusing take on the statement read by French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin in response to Colin Powell's UN presentation, including this sort of thing:

Did he honestly recommend that Baghdad could demonstrate its intent to cooperate by "by adopting legislation prohibiting the manufacture weapons of mass destruction?" (Yup, he did--I checked the transcript.)

This may not have been intended as an actual joke, but neither was it anything like a serious proposal. Many have interpreted the current round of French lollygagging and intransigence (as opposed to all the previous rounds of French lollygagging and intransigence on Iraq) as some kind of unprecedented, cataclysmic blow to French-US relations. There are those who, perhaps understandably, dearly wish that this were the case, who enthusiastically applaud Richard Perle's recent inflammatory statement that the French are no longer our allies. That, it seems to me, is an exaggeration fueled by fairly perverse wishful thinking.

It hardly matters what the French Foreign Minister says at this juncture. Pass anti-WMD legislation? Triple the number of inspectors? He might as well have proposed that all Iraqis wear their underwear only on Tuesdays and Thursdays and that all underwear be worn on the outside so we can check. They have concluded, correctly I'd say, that they have plenty of time for lollygagging, and they have based this conclusion on our own lollygagging; they have determined that their best chance for retaining a smidgeon of influence and stature is to obstruct and play around for as long as possible till the last moment, holding out for as many concessions and glittering prizes as they can get. It may be that, in formulating their lollygagging policy, they slightly miscalculated the US's lollygagging rate. Maybe this miscalculation will cost them something. But they'll still get some of the prizes. They'll still be allies. They'll still be annoying. Germany might be another story, however...

Meanwhile, John Podhoretz has written the same "get ready for victory" column he always writes whenever the Bush administration manages to do something that that can't be characterized as an out and out fiasco. Now I don't disagree with any of the main points of this column. But when Podhoretz writes that "Powell's masterful and inarguable presentation yesterday means the administration has once again outflanked its adversaries and out-argued its opponents," what adversaries and opponents is he talking about? The French? A.N.S.W.E.R.? Tom Daschle? Al Sharpton? Sheryl Crow? OK, but I seem to recall that there's another adversary still out there. It might be more prudent, or at least more tasteful, to wait for the war to happen before declaring victory. But maybe that's just me.

Posted by Dr. Frank at February 6, 2003 09:12 AM | TrackBack