…Bangladesh
Statement issued on November 17, 2007
“The Minister of Foreign and European Affairs, Bernard Kouchner, offers his profound condolences to the government and people of Bangladesh in the wake of Cyclone Sidr which struck across the country causing over a thousand victims and destroying countless homes.
“The Minister of Foreign and European Affairs hails the remarkable mobilization of the Bangladeshi authorities which permitted large numbers of threatened people to be evacuated, thereby avoiding an even heavier human toll.
“The Minister of Foreign and European affairs expresses his sympathy to the victims’ families and loved ones, and his solidarity with the government of Bangladesh at this painful time.”
France is also setting in place humanitarian aid in the amount of 500,000 euros, two-thirds of it for food aid which is in the process of being delivered.
…French humanitarian aid to Bangladesh following cyclone Sidr
Press briefing given by Foreign Ministry spokesperson, November 20, 2007
France affirms its utmost solidarity with Bangladesh.
Our aid now amounts to €600,000. It is divided between approximately €300,000 in food aid and €300,000 in emergency aid. Emergency aid credits have been allocated by our embassy in Dacca to a French-Bangladeshi NGO, “Friendship,” which specializes in providing a humanitarian response to crises (medical aid, drinking water, food aid, aid in rebuilding homes, the reconstitution of means of subsistence).
France is also contributing through a European aid package of €6.5 million that has just been decided upon; it is the second-largest contributor, accounting for 16 percent of the total, or more than a million euros.
The minister of foreign and European affairs remains in continuous contact with NGOs (Médecins du Monde, Première Urgence, Solidarités, Handicap International) and with the French Red Cross, which are mobilizing in response to the cyclone.
...Lebanon
Press briefing given by Foreign Ministry spokesperson, November 23, 2007
Q: Is the minister going to denounce those who prevented the election of a president, as he said he would?
The minister said yesterday that this wasn’t the time for accusations or denunciations. He also said he was prepared to continue doing everything he could to facilitate the pursuit of discussions.
Q: You could say there’s a been a “non-unblocking” of the situation in Lebanon; could you say that French mediation has failed?
It’s not France’s failure. It’s the failure of the discussions that took place among the Lebanese. The minister’s role was that of facilitator. He did everything he could to help with discussions, help with a rapprochement. He met a lot of people. We see today that the Lebanese did not manage to agree. France will continue to do everything it can to help bring about a solution.
Q: Do you have any comment on General Aoun’s initiative yesterday, and on the communiqué that rejected that initiative?
I took note of it. It falls within the province of discussions among the Lebanese. Our only concern is to foster discussions and the means of reaching an agreement on a broad-based president. That has always remained our position. We support any gestures that help with that; we don’t support gestures that hinder it.
Q: Mr. Kouchner has been practicing shuttle diplomacy since July with respect to the Lebanese issue. Now that it can be seen that there haven’t been any results (he even had the backing of European ministers, and not the least of them), what direction will French diplomacy take?
I don’t think it should be said that there’s nothing left for us to do. Talks are continuing. Let me remind you that the minister was in Beirut a few weeks ago with Mr. D’Alema and Mr. Moratinos, not to mention all the discussions, the ongoing coordination and talks that have been going on with other Europeans. France will continue to do everything it can to help with the continuation of talks, with a view to finding a solution.
Q: The deadline has now passed. There has been no softening of the Syrian position, as France had hoped, despite the various contacts and phone conversations between the presidents. What will your position toward Damascus be now?
We are continuing to send Damascus the message you are already aware of—that is, not to hinder the smooth unfolding of the process. Today we see that the process has not unfolded the way we had hoped. But this isn’t the time for accusations. We will continue to remind the Syrians and everyone else that the aim isn’t to hinder the process but to help it unfold smoothly.
Q: You said you would take a position after the deadline for presidential elections.
That date was postponed until November 30. We hope discussions will continue. We hope the constitutional election will be held that evening. We continue to hope that the process will be completed by November 30 because that seems to be the next deadline. Our concern is to ensure that everything goes smoothly and that the Lebanese can achieve the election of a broad-based president.
Q: And if they don’t?
We hope they will. If there’s a new deadline, that means there’s still hope. We see that the process is a difficult one, that there are deadlocks, but there’s now a new deadline; let’s hope it will be the one.
(…) Q: Will the foreign minister return to Beirut, and if so, when?
He will go back if he believes it’s useful. I can’t say anything more about that today. He just spent several days there.
He remains at the disposal of his Lebanese friends.
Q: Yesterday, Mr. Martinon, the Elysée spokesman, said that France was counting on all players—national, regional, neighboring, less neighboring—to foster the process in Lebanon, and that France would comment on the situation if it didn’t go as foreseen. Now that we know it isn’t going as foreseen, what is France’s reaction ?
We are waiting to see how the discussions will go, and we hope they will lead to a result.
Q: So according to you, there’s no failure for the time being?
No, we’re not going to speak of failure because a new date has been set.
(…) Q: Will the choice of having a president elected by a simple majority have the support of France?
We support whatever corresponds with the Lebanese Constitution and what the Lebanese decide in respect of that Constitution.
Q: The French press today is talking about France’s loss of credibility and even about a snub. What’s your position on those comments?
France, and Mr. Kouchner in particular, demonstrated its involvement in this issue, the interest it attaches to what goes on in Lebanon and throughout the entire region. As we’ve said: Lebanon’s stability is important to the stability of the region. Today, we’re facing a new date. Mr. Kouchner’s mediation work was lauded, you know it quite well. It therefore seems quite unfounded to talk about a loss of credibility or a failure. I don’t think that’s the reality.
Q: Tonight at midnight, Beirut time, Emile Lahoud’s term will be over. There’s a current government in Lebanon that you support and that you’ve supported for a long time—Fouad Siniora’s government. Will France continue to support Fouad Siniora’s government as of tomorrow?
We support Fouad Siniora’s government. We know what’s written in the Lebanese Constitution; we are familiar with its institutional consequences. If the Lebanese decide to continue discussions, to give themselves more time, we will wait and see what comes of it. A new deadline was set; let’s be patient. We hope discussions will continue in order to reach a result, in respect of the Lebanese Constitution.
…Annapolis Conference
Press briefing given by Foreign Ministry spokesperson, November 23, 2007
Q: On several occasions, France hoped and announced that the Annapolis Conference would take place after the Lebanese elections. Now that we know that it will take place before the Lebanese elections, what will France’s position be on this Annapolis meeting ?
We regret that the election wasn’t able to take place on schedule as planned because, as we indeed said, we hoped Annapolis would take place after the Lebanese elections in order to profit from the positive dynamic created by the election of a Lebanese president.
But as that election did not take place today, we note that it will not be possible to use this positive dynamic.
Nevertheless, the Annapolis Conference should, we hope, play a very positive role in the continuation of the peace process.
That is our hope in going to Annapolis.
Q: What dynamic are you talking about?
The smooth unfolding of the presidential election in Lebanon would have created a positive political momentum for the whole region. A dynamic exists, in fact, for the Annapolis Conference thanks to the discussions and good relations between Mahmoud Abbas and Ehud Olmert.
Q: Will the Golan be discussed in Annapolis?
We’ve heard what some hope on that subject but for now, I have no answer.
Q: And what’s your position?
We have not taken a formal position in the context of the Annapolis Conference. We’ve always hoped Syria would participate in the Annapolis Conference, and we are in favor of applying the pertinent UN resolutions. But as for the conference agenda, the Americans are the inviting power. We are waiting to see what they propose.
Q: Do they mention it in their letter?
That’s up to them to make public
Q: Yesterday, the Egyptian, Jordanian and Palestinian heads of state demanded the establishment of a precise timetable for the proclamation and creation of a Palestinian State. Does France support that call?
I didn’t see such a formal demand by those three heads of state. We knew it was President Mahmoud Abbas’s demand. We’ll look into it. But as for the idea of a timetable, we’ve always said that within the framework of the discussions that would take place, the idea seemed logical.
…France/Colombia/Venezuela
- Press briefing given by Foreign Ministry spokesperson, November 22, 2007
Q: Is France going to make any kind of demarche with the Colombian government after the announcement of the end of Mr. Chavez’s mediation on hostages being held by the FARC?
We remain determined to seek a humanitarian solution that puts an end to the tragic hostage situation in Colombia. We therefore support all efforts of facilitation and mediation on behalf of the hostages’ release, as we have reiterated to President Chavez.
- Press briefing given by Foreign Ministry spokesperson, November 23, 2007
Q: Are there any new developments in the Colombia hostage affair? Has the ambassador returned to Bogotá?
As you know, the President of the Republic sent a message to the Colombian president asking him to reverse his decision to end mediation efforts by President Chavez. That’s where we stand right now. Our ambassador will be in Bogotá on Monday.
Q: So the ambassador isn’t back in Bogotá yet?
I think he’s leaving on Sunday.
…Iran/Nuclear Issue
Press briefing given by Foreign Ministry spokesperson, November 20, 2007
Q: Russia asked Iran yesterday to clear up the ambiguity surrounding its nuclear program. Does this statement mean that it’s moving closer to your position?
We have a position which is already very close. It appears in the E3 + 3 statement which was adopted in New York on September 28. I would remind you that the signatories to the statement are not just France, Germany and the UK but also the US, Russia and China. The Russians are asking Iran, like the other countries in the group of Six, to comply with the international community’s demands, specifically with respect to its past activities, and to suspend its sensitive activities.
Q: The last meeting that was due to be held was put off because of China’s position. So China really isn’t close to your position?
China has not brought into question the E3 + 3 statement. There have been several reactions to Mr. ElBaradei’s report. We’re also waiting for Mr. Solana’s report before considering the consequences that we must reach as Six.
|
