Chirac: France would use nuclear arms if attacked



French president Jacques Chirac has warned France could use nuclear arms if attacked by a state or state-supported terrorist group.

Speaking at a nuclear base in Brittany (France), Mr Chirac said "The leaders of states who would use terrorist means against us, as well as those who would consider using in one way or another weapons of mass destruction, must understand that they would lay themselves open to a firm and adapted response on our part."

He added that such a response could be a conventional one, but "It could also be of a different kind."

Analysts point out that it is the first time the French leader has linked the possibility of the country's nuclear response to a terrorist attack, arguing that it means a policy change.

France and Britain are the only two EU countries holding an independent nuclear deterrent, while Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy and Turkey, which is on the waiting list to join the bloc, are hosting US nuclear weapons on their territory.

The French nuclear arms programe was ordered in 1960 by Charles de Gaulle, and it has been scaled down to around 350 nuclear weapons after the end of Cold War, according to BBC.

Tensions over Iran looming
Mr Chirac's statement comes amid growing tensions over Iran's resumed nuclear activities.

While Tehran claims it wants to use the enrichment project purely for research and the production of energy, the international community fears it could be used for developing nuclear weapons.

The UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is scheduled to hold an emergency meeting on the issue in two weeks (2 February).

The US and the EU trio - Britain, Germany and France - are considering to press for Iran's referral to the Security Council at the meeting, while Russia and China are still reluctant to support such a move.

Beijing called on the EU to return to negotiations with Tehran, cancelled after the Islamic country broke the UN seals on uranium enrichment equipment earlier this month, while also pressing on Iran to halt its nucleal activities.

UN secretary general Kofi Annan has also urged the world's leaders to push for a diplomatic solution at the IAEA level.


Eat your Wheaties! (http://euobserver.com/9/20729)20.01.2006 - 09:59 CET | By Lucia Kubosova

I think it's time we elect a new president (in fact it has been the case for 11 years !)
My theorry about that unexpected warnig is that it's mostly directed at french opinion.
Chirac is old, his popularity has been plummeting these last month, and with the perspective of presidential elections in one year, in which he obviously won't be able to take part, his power is slowly going down.
But there is one issue in which he still has uncontested leadership : the atomic button.
So, by raising this issue, he hopes the political debate in France will focus on something than can remind people he's still the boss.
I also suspect he hopes this debate will favour his favorite candidate for next elections, premier De Villepin, against his rightwing competitor Sarkozy. Villepin has a more moderate and less trigger-happy image, and I guess many people would think Sarkozy is not responsible enough to be in charge with the atomic button.
Apart from that, I don't really see Chirac sending atomic missiles on any country : Iran is way too far and hardly a direct threat for France, and anyway this would be totally irresponsible.

astrapol 2

Could it perhaps be that Chirac sees things differently when it is his country that would be attacked by terrorists than when it is another country? The recent riots have shown him that there is always the possibility that an outside agitator could subvert the anger of the French Moslem youth into acts of terrorism.

When the attacks are in Spain, Britain, and especially the United States it is easy to be above the fray but when there is the possibility they might hit home in France it becomes an entirely different matter.

I'm not sure why the French have atomic weapons. The idea that the French would ever use them is absurd. Lets face it - if they fired them 99% certain they wouldn't work anyway.

LOL :D either that or a flag with the word "BANG!" on it would pop out of the warhead

Originally posted by DrewM
Lets face it - if they fired them 99% certain they wouldn't work anyway. That's extremely unlikely. France has the most advanced nuclear industry in the world.

Originally posted by sedan
That's extremely unlikely. France has the most advanced nuclear industry in the world.


:@@: what exactly does it mean to have an advanced nuclear industry? If you mean power, then yes, you may be right, but as far as weapons go, beyond hitting a target 7000 miles away within 10 meters and blowing the crap out of it with a 100 megaton warhead, which we can do now, how much more advanced do you have to be? What do french nukes have that ours dont? Expresso machines?

Originally posted by Travh20
:@@: what exactly does it mean to have an advanced nuclear industry?It means that if they want a bomb to work, it will. France has conducted extensive testing of their nuclear weapons. They know they will work, insofar as it is humanly possible for anyone to know before actual detonation.

ya, where do you think godzilla came from? the french and their nuclear testing in the pacific is where, thanks france :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Travh20
ya, where do you think godzilla came from? the french and their nuclear testing in the pacific is where, thanks france :rolleyes: True. Chirac doesn't have to threaten anyone with a nuclear attack. All he has to do is threaten to begin testing again. Coming soon .... to an ocean near YOU!

thats a great idea! we could resume nuclear testing in Iran!

Originally posted by sedan
That's extremely unlikely. France has the most advanced nuclear industry in the world.

I was joking.

Originally posted by sedan
That's extremely unlikely. France has the most advanced nuclear industry in the world.

Not to mention a lot of experience firing missiles.

"Not to mention a lot of experience firing missiles."

Due to their warlike nature and repeatedly being in armed conflicts, the French military is at the absolute peak of conditioning, ready to respond at a moments' notice to the utterances of the Commander - in - Chief.

Now now Drew,your showing your horns there,as Sedan has stated,France is very advanced in Nuclear Technology,the most advanced in Europe,if not the world.My problem with not only Chiracs statement,but with Nuclear supporters is,1.There would be a serious chance of starting a chain reaction which could spell the end of mankind.2.All these 'terrorist'threats dont come from one country or region,they are spread out over vast areas of Asia and Europe,so against this threat the Nuclear option is unpractical.

UN secretary general Kofi Annan has also urged the world's leaders to push for a diplomatic solution at the IAEA level.


In other words, do a whole bunch of nothing, dammit. We've done negotiation with the Iranians for how long? They have no intention of obeying anyone's call to disarm. They've got huge stockpiles of oil they've got huge sums of money and the one country in the world that would actually do something about is right now tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan.


Apart from that, I don't really see Chirac sending atomic missiles on any country : Iran is way too far and hardly a direct threat for France, and anyway this would be totally irresponsible.


Astropol,

You have a partial point, the only people the Iranians would use nuclear weapons against, in the near future at least, would be the Israelis. However, Iranians have purchased missles capapble of hitting Western Europe. So if Ahmandinejad decides to starts flipping nukes, it's going to make Europe very, very uncomfortable.

Astropol,

You have a partial point, the only people the Iranians would use nuclear weapons against, in the near future at least, would be the Israelis. However, Iranians have purchased missles capapble of hitting Western Europe. So if Ahmandinejad decides to starts flipping nukes, it's going to make Europe very, very uncomfortable.

I don"t really understand what you mean. Yes, it would make Europe very unconfortable, in fact it would make the whole world very unconfortable, I agree. But Chirac was not talking about that. He was talking about terrorism.

France is obviously using terrorism as an excuse for future use of nuclear weapons. He mentions fighting terrorism and is the US going to give them hell for stating that they will use nuclear weapons? Not a chance. We already spent so much money on fighting terrorism and on propeganda trying to scare people, trying to convince people that everyone in the US might be killed by terrorists the next day, that we can't bitch at ANYONE about their willingness to use excessive force if it's against terrorists (even if that was just a sidenote, notice how he stated 'any states' and then added on 'or state sponsored terrorists)

Guys,lets get one thing clear here,no,I repeat,no,soverign government in the western hemisphere is gonna strike first with nukes,Islamist extrememes know this,the Iranian gov knows this,I think Iran would like nukes,but only because it sees itself as next on the Pentagon world tour,the most likly source of any first strike in the world at present would be Pakistan in my eyes.The military cant control that place forever,and once Gen.Mousharrif goes,who knows who would end up with their nuclear arsenal,maybe The Taliban,maybe even al Quida,who knows.

Guys,lets get one thing clear here,no,I repeat,no,soverign government in the western hemisphere is gonna strike first with nukes

True, but the question really is "will they respond with nukes"

The nations who have established themselves in the world, and nations who have the most to lose will be less likely to use weapons such as nukes. Personally, I don't think nukes will come out of any of the established nations in the next 50-100 years. If someone does use a nuke, it would probably be a proxy of one of these nations, because very very few terrorist orgs have the money to buy nukes, and no nation would smear their name and face the rest of the world by firing one.

Whats your opinoin on what I said about Pakistan,now and in the future..

Hmmmm,interesting thread!

Whats your opinoin on what I said about Pakistan,now and in the future..Bacala: "Ya know, Quasimodo predicted all this."

Tony: "Who did what?"

Bacala: "All these problems, the Middle East, the end of the world."

Tony: "Nostradamus... Quasimodo's the hunchback of Notre Dame."

Bacala: "Oh, right. Notre Damus."

Tony: "Nostradamus... and Notre Dame. It's two different things completely."

Whats your opinoin on what I said about Pakistan,now and in the future..

Hard to predict what might happen in Pakistan, but I wouldn't expect a terrorist takeover in that country so much as a military coup.

I don't know enough about Pakistan at the moment to make a decision on that, but I still think the next nuke will be launched by a nation's proxy, not a nation itself.