THE DEBATE in the French National Assembly yesterday was supposed to be about the defence agreement which President Jacques Chirac and Chancellor Helmut Kohl signed in secret on December 9th.
But it showed principally how poor relations are between the executive and legislative branches.
Most of all, it highlighted the insecurities of present day Frenchmen: fear of a reunited Germany, misgivings about the loss of French identity and sovereignty, and resentment of the US role as sole superpower and commander of NATO.
Opposition parliamentarians booed when Mr Herve de Charette, the Foreign Minister, admitted there had been "administrative imperfections" in the way the government dealt with parliament over the accord. The Communist deputy, Mr Alain Bocquet, said it was "an intolerable outrage" that the assembly learned of the document only after the Bundestag, the WFU. NATO, the US Defence Department and the daily newspaper Le Monde.
Mr Laurent Fabius, the former Socialist prime minister, noted sarcastically that "despite the excellent French postal system, it took 10 weeks for a 20 page document to cross the 500 metres between the Elysee and the Palais Bourbon". (The Palais Bourbon is home to the National Assembly.). The executive had been "neither very elegant nor very democratic" towards the elected body, Mr Fabius said. "Was it a mistake? We'd like to believe it, but the extent and the frequency of such mistakes have made them a rule of government."
The government's failure to consult the assembly about no clear tests in the South Pacific, the abolition of conscription and the recent military intervention in central Africa were all examples of the government's cavalier treatment of parliament, he said.
While the government's policy "vaunts Franco German friendship", Mr Fabius said, "in reality it gives in more and more to American power, thereby risking cutting off the chances of a real European defence... The label is the Franco German agreement. The contents are a drift towards submission to the US and NATO." The text, he said, resembles a statement by the Atlantic Alliance more than a French declaration".
It was ironic that members of President Chirac's RPR and his allies in the centre right UDF remained silent or supported the accord. Both conservative parties claim to defend the legacy of Gen Charles de Gaulle, who pulled France out of NATO integrated command in 1966. But yesterday it was the left wing opposition which denounced the alleged affront to his memory.
The Socialist leader, Mr Lionel Jospin, said the text constituted the "NATO-isation" of France.
Mr Jean Pierre Chevenement, the former defence minister, said the accord signified nothing less than the end of France: "France is disappearing a little more every day, through decisions that are taken without consulting the people. .. What is the nature of NATO? NATO is American. The commander is American." He went on to ridicule Mr de Charette for the way France this month retracted its demand that NATO's southern command be entrusted to a European, after the US rejected the idea.
Defending the agreement, Mr de Charette insisted that the document was not a treaty. It isn't even an agreement in the international sense of the word," he said. Citing a speech on joint strategy delivered by the late President Francois Mitterrand in 1987, the establishment of the Franco German brigade in 1988 and the creation of the Eurocorps in 1992, Mr de Charette said the accord
"follows in a long tradition of Franco German co operation in this field." Its chief innovation, he added, is that for the first time it: has been set down on paper.
