US embassy cable - 05PARIS8029

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 008029 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 11/21/2015 
TAGS: PREL, MARR, FR, NATO, EUN 
SUBJECT: NATO - FRENCH STILL RETICENT ON USE OF NAC-R 
 
Classified By: Political Minister-Counselor Josiah Rosenblatt, Reason 1 
.4 B/D 
 
1. (C) Summary: On November 21, MOD Strategic Affairs officer 
Colonel Creux provided a very positive readout of Strategic 
Affairs Director Jean Ponton d'Amecourt's October 31 meetings 
at the Pentagon, the NSC, and the Department.  While 
outstanding issues remain with the Pentagon, most notably the 
French request for more frequent senior-level contacts and 
for the signing of a Declaration of Principles, Ponton 
d'Amecourt left with a sense that progress was possible.  In 
discussing the extension of the Afghanistan Oplan at NATO and 
French resistance to discussions on the Middle East at a 
reinforced NAC (NAC-R), Creux volunteered that France did not 
believe the Middle East, Korea and other such "political" 
issues should be raised at the NAC-R.  While holding informal 
discussions at NATO on such issues was acceptable, NAC-R 
meetings risked leading to new NATO initiatives for which the 
alliance had neither sufficient resources nor the funds.  End 
Summary. 
 
MOD Alliot-Marie to the U.S. in 2006 
------------------------------------ 
 
2. (C) Colonel Creux, responsible for NATO/ESDP, provided 
pol/miloff with a brief readout of MOD's Strategic Affairs 
Director's Ponton d'Amecourt's October 31-November 1 
consultations at DOD, State and the NSC.  He said Ponton 
d'Amecourt was very satisfied with his introductory calls in 
Washington, especially with the level of access he enjoyed 
and the warm welcome extended by all.  At the Pentagon, he 
met with U/S for Policy Eric Edelman and Principal Director 
for Europe and NATO James Townsend.  Ponton d'Amecourt 
welcomed the improved ties with the Pentagon, which had 
suffered as a result of differences over Iraq, but have since 
been improving.  Ponton d'Amecourt would welcome reciprocal 
DOD visits to Paris, Creux added.  Ponton d'Amecourt observed 
that differences on certain issues still remained, especially 
with regard to the unfulfilled French request for the signing 
of a Declarations of Principles with the U.S.  Creux said the 
MOD understood the U.S. position that a Declaration of 
Principles was not essential to the relationship, however, it 
was difficult to understand why the U.S. was prepared to sign 
Declaration of Principles with other European countries, but 
not with France. 
 
3. (C) Creux stated that Ponton d'Amecourt planned to visit 
the U.S. on a periodic basis.  His next trip would be in 
February 2006, when he planned to be in Washington, but also 
would include stops at ACT command, JFCOM, and at the UN. 
Ponton d'Amecourt also expected to accompany Defense Minister 
Alliot-Marie later in the spring to the U.S.  A potential 
March 2006 date is under consideration for the Minister's 
trip. 
 
NAC-R and non-defense issues 
---------------------------- 
 
4. (C) Turning to current issues at NATO, pol/miloff queried 
Creux as to French objections to the proposed wording of the 
Afghanistan Oplan under discussion at NATO, noting that it 
was important not to re-open the Oplan in order to  move 
forward before the December NATO ministerial.  Creux 
confirmed that France had that very morning agreed on the 
latest proposal worked out among the U.S., French, and other 
PermReps.  (Note: Several days earlier, Creux's counterpart 
at the MFA, Francois Carrel-Billiard, stressed that France 
wanted to settle this issue expeditiously, and definitely 
before the December ministerial.) 
 
5. (C) We also queried Creux on French objections to NAC-R 
discussions on the Middle East and French unwillingness to 
send Paris representation.  Creux said the NAC-R issue was 
only part of a broader problem.  France, he noted, believes 
that a fundamental problem at NATO is that Alliance members 
are not carrying their weight in terms of force contributions 
and financial commitments.  This made it difficult to 
understand why the U.S. sought to expand discussions to new 
areas and/or operations.  France, he added, did not object to 
informal discussions at NATO on the Middle East, Korea or any 
other issue.  The problem with the NAC-R is that, in that 
forum, following a presentation, pressure builds for NATO to 
respond to a perceived need and/or to initiate new operations 
without a corresponding assessment of resources available. 
Many Alliance members are unwilling or unable to contribute, 
he claimed, forcing a core group of members to bear the 
increasingly heavy costs.  He cited the U.S., Germany, the 
U.K., Italy and France as among those countries.  We need to 
fix this problem at NATO, he asserted, as France values NATO 
highly and does not want to see it hampered by an inability 
to meet its obligations.  When poloff insisted on the 
importance of ensuring that NATO also remains a forum for 
political dialog, Colonel Creux said France would continue to 
have problems with the NAC-R as an appropriate format. 
6. (C) Creux cited proposals at NATO for expanding the use of 
common funding as an unsatisfactory means of addressing the 
unwillingness of certain Alliance members to carry their fair 
share.  Additionally, Creux noted that the reluctance of some 
Alliance members to speak up gave the appearance that France 
was isolated in its objectives.  France is not happy in this 
role, but it will continue to voice its concerns at NATO, he 
emphasized. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
7. (C) Colonel Creux echoed comments we have heard recently 
at the MFA against expanding the range of topics for 
discussion at the NAC-R.  Creux sought to avoid framing 
French objections as a "theological debate," arguing that 
France is driven by a concern for NATO's stretched resources. 
 France's own commitments, with some 35,000 personnel 
deployed overseas, are stretching its own defense budget and 
fuel French objections. 
8.  (C) Given France's history of attempting to restrict 
NATO's focus to security issues, it is difficult to accept 
that that the French are driven only by a genuine wish for 
reform rather than the desire to contain NATO in the interest 
of building up Europe's own defense forces (ESDP).  The 
diminished resource argument equally applies to the EU and 
NATO, given the Europeans' inadequate expenditures on 
defense.  It would be interesting to know whether France 
expresses the same concerns about burdensharing, and attempts 
to limit the range of the agenda, in EU discussions of global 
security concerns and potential action under ESDP.  End 
Comment. 
 
 
 
Please visit Paris' Classified Website at: 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/eur/paris/index.c fm 
 
Stapleton