Qui en eut douté ? Ils sont faits pour s’entendre

Qui en eût douté ? Ils sont faits pour s’entendre

17 novembre 2004 — Blair ne garde aucune rancune à Chirac de ses remarques de lundi. Il faut être po-si-tif. Un article du Financial Times de ce matin ne nous laisse aucun doute là-dessus.

Directement “inspiré” par Downing Street, cet article met en évidence tous les terrains d’entente nécessaires entre les deux hommes, en plus de leur sympathie commune bien connue (« “Whatever the ups and downs . . . Blair and Chirac get on each with other,” said a Downing Street aide. “Blair often says that whatever their differences he especially likes talking to Chirac. And there are good reasons to think that the president feels the same way about Blair.” ») A le lire, il apparaît évident qu’on pourrait bien voir s’ouvrir une nouvelle ère d’Entente Cordiale, au moment où on boucle les cérémonies du centenaire de cette Entente (raison protocolaire de la visite de Chirac à Londres demain et vendredi).

On appréciera le ton de l’article du Financial Times, rarement aussi amical et bienveillant pour un président français. Le FT arrive même à trouver dans la position française sur les relations transatlantiques un utile complément pour la politique transatlantique de Tony Blair. Cet optimisme est remarquable bien qu’il coupe un peu le souffle… Tout va tellement bien que les proches de Blair suggèrent qu’il y aurait presque une doctrine originale du président français (le “chiraquisme”, ou chiracism, certes).

« As they prepare for Mr Chirac's arrival, the mood in Downing Street on Tuesday was upbeat. “If journalists ask Chirac what he thinks about the Iraq war, then he will say what he thinks,” said an aide to the prime minister. “But there is no doubt, either, that Chirac will want to accentuate the positive aspects of our bilateral relationship.”

»In a meeting with British journalists this week, Mr Chirac confirmed this impression. He said the UK and France “must seize the occasion” to strengthen Europe and work towards their common global goals.

»He also said France was prepared to consign its sometimes bitter disagreements with the UK over the Iraq war to history. “Britain took one position that it felt reasonable. France took another. That's a fact,” he said. “But one should not become obsessed by the idea of one particular problem, even if it was important.”

»There are several reasons why both men think this is a propitious moment to develop the bilateral relationship. Mr Blair and Mr Chirac strongly back the EU's constitutional treaty and the opening of accession talks with Turkey. But both men face a tough job carrying their own voters on these issues. France is due to hold a referendum on the constitutional treaty, probably in the second half of 2005, while the British government will call a vote in early 2006.

»British and French officials also suggest both governments are keen to forge a common agenda on numerous fronts: African development; climate change; the pursuit of the Middle East peace process; and the strengthening of the transatlantic relationship, the “backbone of our security.” “We have converging ambitions with Tony Blair,” Mr Chirac told the British press.

»But there are differences, too. Mr Chirac's vision of Europe appears far more ambitious than that of Mr Blair and he remains far more wary of the Bush administration; hence the French president's scepticism about whether the UK's “special relationship” with the US had yet resulted in any payback.

»Mr Chirac is also wedded to the vision of building an alternative model to US power out of Europe's diverse member states. “His vision is to make Europe a laboratory for a global democracy embracing different nations and cultures,” a senior French official said, suggesting this was why Mr Chirac was backing Turkey's entry into the EU despite stiff resistance among French voters.

»Mr Chirac said this week that Europe must grow more united as new poles of power developed elsewhere in the world: in China, India, South America and Africa. The French president said it would be essential to strengthen multilateral organisations in an increasingly multi-polar world.

»But he also stressed that Europe and the US shared the same values and must work ever more closely together. He said it was “absurd” to suggest that Europe was being built in opposition to the US. “It is absurd because, quite simply, it does not conform to the interest of mankind and the evolution of history,” he said.

»Mr Blair's aides believe President Chirac's comments on transatlantic relations this week are helpful. “The French will play hard-to-get and they won't dispense with the essential elements of Chiracism,” said one UK official. “But there is no doubt either that they will want to get back in with the new Bush administration.” »

A côté de l’amoncellement de confidences et de déclarations de pure relations publiques, on distingue, parce que c’est une évidence, une volonté britannique (partagée plus discrètement par les Français) de rapprochement. La cause en est simple : même Blair commence à s’apercevoir de ce que certains conseillers lui disent discrètement, et de ce que la presse écrit régulièrement : que ce soit sur le Moyen-Orient ou sur d’autres questions, GW et Washington sont aujourd’hui encore plus unilatéralistes qu’hier et ne céderont rien de substantiel à Blair. Blair obtiendra encore moins que ce qu’il a déjà obtenu, c’est-à-dire “moins que rien”, et même l’establishment commence à partager cette analyse, comme l’exprime le Times du 16 novembre. S’il veut effectuer une courbe rentrante vers l’Europe, les Français l’aideront sans trop appuyer sur ses erreurs. La rencontre de demain sera peut-être l’occasion de l’amorce de cette manoeuvre.

Mais le vrai sujet européen, évoqué par les Français et moins par les Britanniques, c’est la défense européenne. C’est l’enjeu principal, surtout lorsque les Français et les Britanniques parlent entre eux. C’est là-dessus qu’on pourra éventuellement mesurer une évolution de la position britannique. On notera cet avis intéressant du président du Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA), perdu dans un compte-rendu général des réactions des Européens après la nomination de Rice comme secrétaire d’État. Certains pourraient considérer cette appréciation comme un appel du pied, ou une prévision.

« Not everyone was convinced that Rice's appointment is all bad. While predicting that a U.S.-Europe partnership is going to be difficult in the next four years, Victor Bulmer-Thomas, the director of the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, said there was a silver lining for Europe.

» “Europe also wants to develop a unified security and foreign policy,” he said. “Paradoxically, a bad relationship with the United States is an opportunity for Europe. Coming up with a unified European policy will be made easier by not having a sympathetic person” as secretary of state. »