By declaring that world must be prepared to the worst, clearly refering to the possibility of a war against Iran, Bernard Kouchner the French ministry of foreign affairs, has attracted perhaps more than initially wanted the attention. Is France making a diplomatic u-turn? Would French new authorities be now aligned on American agenda, putting an end to the traditional strategic independence ,which was the fifth republic trademark ? Would we attend to the renunciation of a policy created by de Gaulle and strictly followed since then by all his successors Mitterand and Chirac included? All the French presidents have declared being united states staunch ally meanwhile emphasizing their independence. During the cold war France had a special status. It had strongly sided with Washington during the worst east-west crisis (Korean war, Berlin wall construction, Cuban missile crisis, euromisiles crisis and so on) but on the other hand it had on many occasion expressed its opposition on some us diplomatic positions, being the outspoken opponent from within western bloc. Being a nuclear power France was not dependent on us nuclear umbrella for its protection. France was attractive for many countries as a western but independent country. After the end of cold war ,and confronted with the surge of unilateralist in USA France, under Jacques Chirac presidency was perceived as the bulwark of multilateralism and international law and international organizations. Ally doesn’t mean aligned. When a friend is mistaken your duty as a friend is to tell him he his wrong. And Paris as a majority thought that Iraqi war was a pure mistake. But in a time when the motto in Washington was "those who are not with US are against us" this independent position was seen as a ill intentioned.

Sarkozy has a clear reputation to be more pro American and pro Israeli than Bush. During the campaign international matters were almost absent from the agenda. some observers were wondering if Sarkozy pro American approach was a tool to differentiate himself from Chirac (some thing purely tactical) or the possibility of a radical change in French foreign policy. But it is very difficult to change a foreign policy as for big tanker their way is not easily changeable. Historical legacy ,national interest geography ,national perception do not change with a finger snap.

For his first speech on international relations ,in front of al French ambassadors at the end of august 2007 Sarkozy had already raised Iranian issue. unsurprisingly ha has recall his opposition to than possession by Iran of nuclear weapons. But it is a view shared by every country on earth. But he has gone further drawing two would be catastrophic scenario an Iran with nuclear weapons or Iran bombing".

Some experts took for granted a support to Americans(or Israelis) plans to drop some missiles over Iran in order to destroy its nuclear capacities? It would not only a different position compared to French attitude with Iraq war, but even more the end of "a certain idea of France" as de Gaulle put it. Could France agree to an illegal war, without any mandate from united nations ?

There are in fact two different perceptions of Sarkozy and Kouchner words according to the first one it is a green light given to future military operations. But according to the second interpretations they only present the situation as dramatic as it is. There is real concerns about us military options. On a rational point of view a new war in the area could only turn out as a catastrophe, bigger that the one stemmed from Iraqi war. It would be impossible to destroy all Iranian nuclear facilities (most of them are hidden underground) .limited operations are not a realistic options Iranian, directly or indirectly will react. Muslim opinion already hotheaded would be infuriated and terrorism will outburst.

On the top of that Sarkozy does not want to be confronted to the following dilemma not to side with us in case of war-and so being again seen as an enemy or supporting (or not condamning) Washington (or Israeli) military options and destroy the capital of sympathy and the prestige of France all around the world. It would also be the end of the honey moon between Sarkozy and French public opinion ,the latest being strongly opposed both to bush and to a new war. Iran was a awful in age in French public. Only 3% has a positive opinion of this country but nether less, a new war seems a cure worst than the disease and Sarkozy knows very well that military operations against Iran is hardly compatible with his Heralded strategic priority : to avoid a clash of civilizations between Muslim and western world. So Sarkozy declarations could be seen as tactical Dramatizing the situation in order to put pressure on Teheran while hoping that this kind of pressure, or economic sanctions would be sufficient to open the way for a diplomatic solution.