De Villepin the Wiretapper: Chirac Names New Prime Minister Following Defe

[CHIMO]

De Villepin the Wiretapper: Chirac Names New Prime Minister Following Defeat Over EU Constitution

AMY GOODMAN: Well, let's start off by you talking about this massive defeat for the European Union constitution and for the French government.

DOUG IRELAND: The Sunday victory of the “no” against the European constitution, Amy, was a political revolt that was a slap in the face to the political elites of France, left, right and center. The leaders of all of the major political formations in France put their reputations on the line and campaigned very hard for a yes vote on the constitution. The rejection of the constitution, however, was not a nationalist rejection. It was an economic rejection, because the French electorate by ten points said no to this constitution because it was perceived as creating a Europe that would be a playground for the multinational corporations. France is in the middle of an economic crisis, 10% unemployment. Factories are being moved from France to low-wage Eastern European countries, a phenomenon the French call delocalization. The anguish and fear of loss of jobs grips a great part of the French employee classes, and the exit polls showed very clearly that the victory of the “no” was driven by economic concerns. Two-thirds of salaried employees voted against the constitution and three-quarters of the working class voted against the constitution. That is why this morning's choice of Dominique de Villepin as the new French prime minister is rather astonishing as a response to this political -- economically motivated political revolt.

AMY GOODMAN: And tomorrow the Dutch are expected to vote down the European constitution.

DOUG IRELAND: Oh, indeed. There's no -- there's very little doubt about it. The last poll has -- yesterday at 60% no in the Netherlands. And that's just the final nail in the coffin of this absolutely dreadful, highly conservative European constitution. You know, there's a myth going around that this constitution would have made Europe stronger. I don't read it that way at all. For me, this was a constitution for a weaker Europe, particularly vis-a-vis Washington. In the new European constitution which has now been rejected by France, it is written in concrete into that constitution that European Union security policy is subordinated to NATO. Moreover, for the European Union to take a position like the position that France and Germany took against the Iraq war, you would have to have unanimity. It means that just as the United States bought off a block of largely Eastern European countries during the Iraq war to support the invasion, Washington did again block the European Union from taking a position even with its strengthened president the new constitution provided for and the strengthened foreign minister. It could block the Union from taking any position in opposition to American ventures abroad rather easily. Moreover, this constitution could never have been amended, except by unanimity, which means that all of the multinational corporations would have to do is buy off some corrupt little country like Albania to block any change in the constitution's infamous Chapter III, which institutionalizes the most savage kind of free market economics. It creates a host of policy decisions leading to privatization and undermines the social safety net in the advanced European western countries.

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/31/1349221

VILLEPIN THE WIRETAPPER, FRANCE'S NEW PRIME MINISTER
http://direland.typepad.com/

[cestpaspossible]

1. Chirac is toast, de Villepin can't save him or even himself, and Sarkozy

is even worse. Hopefully the right will divide between Sarkozy/LePen and the left can unite around someone enough to win in 2007.

[Mass]

3. Unfortunately, at this point, it does not seem to be the case

Hollande and Strauss-Kahn, the supporters of the YES, have been badly beaten.

Fabius has never been very popular, and the other proponents of the NO do not have the type of experience the Left asks for in a President.

In addition, Sarkozy may attract many Le Pen supporters in the final round of the election where Le Pen will not be present, with his anti-immigrant stance.

Let's hope that somebody on the Left can unify the movement and that the same thing that happened in 02 will not happen (a Sarkozy/Le Pen choice is not a choice I want to have to face - Chirac/Le Pen was bad enough).

[KoKo]

2. *Sigh* Villepin was a hero to those of us who tried to stop Iraq Invasion

Reading this about him, makes him seem such a villan, I wonder if it all can be true.

He was a "class act" in front of the UN in contrast to the Bush Thugs. It's hard to see him as the "Hooveresque Wiretapper." But, then in the articles I read on Ireland's site he doesn't seem to like any of the French "candidates." It's hard to understand why the French would pick people who are for "privitization and more Bushlike policies" over the Socialists who Ireland seems to find fault with, too.

If the French are truly that upset with their government why would they have voted for Chirac in the first place, and kept others of a more conservative bend since the 80's. :shrug:

Their government seems very complicated with such varying factions. Maybe that's a good thing considering we are working quickly towards "one party" government here in the US.