ISLAMABAD, Oct 22: The Americans have suffered tactical defeat in Fallujah in real Vietnam fashion, Dr Bruno Tertrais, a French scholar of strategic sciences said.
Dr Bruno Tertrais, a senior scholar at Paris Foundation for Strategic Research, in a talk titled: "How to live with the US?: the French experience", held at the Institute of Strategic Studies here on Friday, said that the US defeat at Fallujah April last was being hotly debated in Washington.
He said the US liked to think of itself as a hammer which must hit every nail around, as naturally the sole superpower dominating world affairs. However, there would come a time when the US would recognize its limit and discover that Iraq was an exception, and the policies of pre-emption and prevention should not be used on other countries.
Dr Tertrais was quite candid about French disagreement with the US about the war in Iraq. He said, "France did not feel it was at war with Iraq and moreover France saw the war on terror more as police operation."
He proceeded to discuss ways in which France had sought accommodation in living with the US. He had no all-purpose recipe, but every country must find their own best recipe in dealing with the US. It was a complex issue and every country must figure that out by itself.
And yet in the context of their differences and separate worldviews the American-French Alliance was the oldest in the world. France also had excellent nuclear cooperation with the United States. But Dr Tertrais said a small country must do a balancing act to live with the awesome power of the US.
He said the fall of Berlin Wall and the loss of World Trade Center (9/11) had been the most potential images which had changed the world and resulted in the loss of legitimacy of the United Nations. Meanwhile the notion of alliances had changed and in addition there was also pervasive wrong notion about the West as a distinct identity persists at all.
He said the Bush doctrine of 'pre-emption' looked much like the law of prevention and this was one of the things, along with others, including the necessity of modifying the UN, and end of the abuse of veto power, which necessitated a dialogue with the US.
France advocated such a dialogue on these matters with Europe as well as Asia. The dialogue must take place in pragmatic and in a spirit of non-confrontation with the US.
Agha Shahi, a former foreign minister and ISS Chairman presided over the talk which was organized with the collaboration of French embassy and the Alliance Francaise. In Mr Shahi's view the 'pre-emptive doctrine meant that some thing unforeseen had arisen that necessitated immediate action outside the law.
This kind of presumption hinged on by-passing the UN and hence patently outside the pale of international law. He felt both 'Pre-emption' and 'prevention' doctrines were illegal under the UN charter and negation of international law.
As for the UN structure, which Dr Tertrais thought, had lost legitimacy, in the wake of 9/11, Afghan and Iraq wars. This subject should be discussed at the UN General Assembly to find ways to cope with the threat of terrorism as well as the fallout from wars on Afghan and Iraq. India and Israel had already claimed to put the law of pre- emption to use, and it was ominous We must consider the chaos it would portend for the world.
