Today's Date:

(...)

The international community is today confronted with forces which are contesting the world public order and challenging the very legitimacy of States, governments and negotiated international rules.

Some of these destabilizing forces are States themselves – sometimes described as pariah or failing States – which are rejecting international rules or proving incapable of enforcing them.

Other organizations, albeit non-State ones, have developed a transnational ability to strike at the heart of our economy, the heart of our society.

An essential lesson must be drawn from this development: our security borders no longer coincide with our geographical ones. They go far beyond them and also fall clearly within them, wherever there's the terrorist threat. But this threat can be supranational just as it can be sub-national.

We mustn't reduce all the threats hanging over the world to terrorism alone. Of course, the overall strategic environment hasn't been stabilized and it's an understatement to say that the end of the cold war hasn't meant the "end of history".

The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction hasn't ceased – quite the reverse – despite the efforts undertaken on disarmament. Links between the States indulging in these practices and terrorism obviously can't be ruled out.

Eleven years after the Gulf War, Iraq remains a serious matter of concern. This country turns out to have concealed weapons of mass destruction programmes from the international community. There seems to be every indication that although Iraq hasn't yet, it seems, managed to build a nuclear weapon, she once again has chemical and biological capabilities at her disposal and is pursuing the development of delivery vehicles for launching ballistic missiles.

Continuance of this situation is all the more unacceptable because it is causing the Iraqi people suffering for which the "oil for food" programme isn't compensating, or is doing so only very partially. It is also weakening the authority of the United Nations. This is very important – it is intolerable to see the United Nations authority disputed and flouted in this way.

This is what is behind France's position, which consists in calling for the disarmament inspectors' swift return and taking Saddam Hussein – who, on 16 September, gave in when faced with the determination of the international community – at his word. I believe this attitude of France's is a particularly responsible one. Today we're seeing France's position gaining ground. It is, I believe, very important at one and the same time to affirm the unity of the international community through the Security Council, take Saddam Hussein at his word, call for the inspectors' unfettered return and ensure that the Security Council is the place where any crucial decision for the future is taken, where there is international unity: there can't be strong pressure unless the international community sticks firmly together. This is precisely the position defined by President Chirac and developed by our ministers and diplomats.

Middle East

Over and above the problem posed by Iraq, there's the whole issue of the Middle East, today prey to uncertainties and the temptations of violence.

Iraq's neighbours have a legitimate security concern in the wake of the wars she has waged against Iran, Kuwait, and her own people, moreover not hesitating – that's something we can't forget – to use chemical weapons against her people. In the past, Iraq has clearly sought to destabilize the whole region. And for two years, we've been well aware of all the worries which exist everywhere. And, also over the past two years, the ties patiently woven between Israelis and Palestinians have been progressively broken. The confrontational approach has replaced that geared to seeking peace.

Israeli society has been destabilized by mindless and murderous terrorist attacks: today every Israeli endures terror in his or her daily life. The Palestinians are suffering from the military action, extreme poverty, the occupation of the territories and obviously the extension of the settlements. They are sinking into despair and violence. And naturally, and this is intolerable, the extremists are prospering on the ruins of the peace process.

So it's necessary to develop a new Israeli-Palestinian relationship, build the future Palestinian State and settle the whole regional crisis, including its Syrian and Lebanese dimensions. This requires a political solution and won't be achieved through perpetual confrontation.

India/Pakistan

Another source of regional tension I'd like to say a word to you about is the Kashmir conflict between India and Pakistan. Quite obviously, there is here especial concern given that these two countries possess nuclear weapons. This conflict creates a state of hostility which has existed for over fifty years but is continually being stirred up by hatred and incomprehension. At the beginning of the summer, sustained exchanges of artillery fire and significant military preparations took place.

A welcome precarious cooling of the situation was achieved thanks to the mobilization of the whole international community in which – and we can be proud of this – France played a very active part. But today, although the risk of war has temporarily receded, the threat remains and, as you know, the situation is dangerous. (...)

Africa/Côte d'Ivoire

In this somewhat gloomy picture, mention has to be made of an almost permanent theatre of tension and crisis: Africa. It is especially important to us French.

Since the end of the cold war, Africa is no longer – and this is welcome – the scene of indirect confrontation between foreign powers. But nevertheless one crisis follows another there. Côte d'Ivoire today is a new example of this. Although that country is a model of prosperity and openness, it too risks sinking into poverty and disorder if political solutions to the stream of challenges it has to confront aren't dealt with in the requisite spirit of concord and democracy.

African Union/Nepad/Recamp

Africa has realized the need itself to make an effort when it comes to its development and the prevention and settlement of its conflicts.

Even so, it knows that it won't be able to implement its initiatives without a close, revamped partnership with the developed countries.

This is the basic purpose of the OAU's transformation into the African Union and the creation of the New Partnership for Africa's Development [NEPAD]. Through the programme to strengthen peacekeeping capabilities [RECAMP], France and other partners are endeavouring to give the African countries the means to resolve themselves the crises shaking the black continent.

Thus Africa is an example of the quest for new balances in a world in which everyone must actively seek to establish a new stability.

Russia/G8/EU

In this uncertain interdependent world, Russia is today emerging as a new factor of stability. The foundations of cooperation with that great country have been laid at different levels. The signature of an agreement limiting nuclear weapons [Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty] was signed with the United States in May 2002, the development of the Russia/NATO partnership and Russia's integration into what has now become the G8 also illustrate this new relationship.

The G8 global non-proliferation partnership [Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction], thanks to which action can be taken to combat the risk of such materials and technology spreading from the territory of the former Soviet Union, is a tangible demonstration of parties coming together in pursuit of shared interests

With the European Union, a top-level institutional relationship has been established opening the way for better mutual understanding and the development of practical economic and political cooperation.

The reforms process, which has admittedly been set in train in Russia, is complex and at times painful when, for example, it involves the modernization of the economy or reform of the armed forces.

Mindsets need to evolve further, but the movement is under way.

The challenge today for Russia is to build a new organization which guarantees all her citizens both autonomy and scope for initiative.

US/Security Council

In this complicated and uncertain world, the United States is still suffering from the shock of the terrorist attacks, which is today leading her to base her strategic doctrine more on the quest for security than that for peace. America seems tempted to go it alone and anxious to legitimize the unilateral and preventive use of force. We can appreciate the traumatic experience she suffered, but we are determined to reiterate the pre-eminence of the law.

While France shares the United States' natural determination to respond to the attack to which she was victim, France wishes her to remain true to a vision of collective security resting on the law, cooperation between States and the authority of the Security Council.

We can't accept any intervention which isn't one of last resort, or any last-resort intervention not in accordance with the law. France herself wants to ensure that in every circumstance the use of force is underpinned by the law. In the great disorder of today's world, France is keen to make her voice heard and defend her values.

Stability/WMD/Europe/Development

That is our ambition. It is President Chirac's and that of the French women and men who expressed it last spring. Our country's universal values teach us that stability isn't the fruit of the balance of power alone: it is primarily that of respect for the law. It is France's duty, more than others, never to be indifferent to the need for the law to take precedence over force, the law linked to human rights.

The first condition for stability is the application of the principles of the United Nations Charter and respect, obviously, for the Security Council.

We must also work collectively on drawing up and consolidating the legal instruments vital for the control of the proliferation of weapons in the world.

Our voice will be stronger and carry further if we act within Europe. It's together, collectively, that we have to fulfil the expectations of those who desire an original response to the issues of the day.

We shall also have to strive to get the rich countries to be more mindful of the well-being, aspirations of the world's have-nots, who make up four fifths of mankind, to join the haves – let's not forget this. It is why, alongside security, the issue of development is openly proclaimed as one of President Chirac and my government's great priorities. It's a message – we clearly feel this – which is today essential for world stability. President Chirac's voice was strong in Johannesburg, France's voice on the UN Security Council is strong today because it encapsulates that generous idea of a world which respects everyone and makes security an essential element, but one which has to be balanced with the demand for development and takes on board all the suffering of the peoples who, today, can't find the route to development.

Defense Strategy

To make France's voice heard, some strategic choices are required. We also need to be able to base our policy on some principles. As regards our defence options, I should like to underline the principles guiding the government's action:

- First, our defence is and remains autonomous, but our policy isn't to go it alone in defence matters.

- The reference for our military choices like our political ones remains Europe.

- The coherence of our policy is achieved through respect for our international commitments.

Strategy Autonomy

Strategic autonomy is an essential component of our independence and freedom of action. This was a choice made for us long ago by General de Gaulle. It allows us to combine strong ambition in the field of defence with a firm political will.

Autonomy means having the ability to act, at any moment, with our allies and partners or indeed alone, in the event of a specific threat.

This autonomy requires us to master skills and essential technologies which make us indispensable partners whose political and military options must be taken into consideration.

In the operational sphere, opting for this autonomy impels us to define the intelligence we want to collect, the choices we want to make and the assets we want to possess, be it in a strictly national framework or a concerted one.

Intelligence – this means having a national situation assessment capability based on autonomous intelligence assets. In several theatres recently we have seen the huge importance for our armed forces of having our own autonomous intelligence assets.

Choices – means having a planning and command capability.

Assets – means possessing the capabilities to carry out independent action, guaranteed by nuclear deterrence.

Defense Europe/NATO/Macedonia

Thanks to her strategic autonomy, France is playing a leading role in building Defence Europe. She can make a full contribution to crisis prevention and management in the international arena. She is, herself, prepared to face up to her own responsibilities. She remains free to join any coalition. That's her freedom.

"European solidarity" has to enable Europe to face up to its security responsibilities, displaying a common approach and giving itself the requisite means. This is fully consistent with transatlantic solidarity.

Because of her economic and military power, the United States plays a preponderant role. At her side, Europe must be able to shoulder its responsibility.

At the Ambassadors' conference, President Chirac reiterated "the pledge systematically to determine what is in Europe's interest when addressing crisis situations". This would bring us closer together and create, as was the case in the Balkans, a unanimity of views conducive to the definition of stronger policies.

Substantial and rapid progress was made between the Saint-Malo Franco-British Summit and Nice European Council: definition of the political and military decision-making mechanisms, definition of a Headline Goal to give the European Security and Defence policy the practical means to allow Europe to act. Europe is thus putting an end to some of the half-heartedness which is no longer acceptable.

There is thus no operational reason preventing the EU from taking over the NATO mission in Macedonia. It would in fact be logical since it is already playing the leading role in that country's economic and political stabilization. It would also provide the opportunity to prove, on the ground, that the European Union and NATO can act totally jointly, without any theoretical precondition.

The Europeans must also show by their budgetary choices their determination to take responsibility for their own security and give themselves the means to influence world affairs.

I hear, in various quarters of Europe, comments about budgetary situations. I would remind all those concerned that the choices France is making for defence are choices for France, choices for the French. But they are also choices for Europe. And if on these matters all Europe's countries saw things the same way as France, perhaps, by pooling our budgetary resources, we would all today achieve even more satisfactory results.

We must together explore all the reasonable possibilities of cooperation and of course, as I was saying, of pooling our resources. That also means that everyone has to start pushing in the same direction.

This might take the form, at the top level, of a joint approach to the various European countries' military requirements, and, further down, of a consolidation of programme structures and the assignment of a bigger role to OCCAR (Organisation conjointe pour la coopération en matière d'armement – Organization for Joint Cooperation in Armaments). That way we can provide a powerful incentive for industrial consolidation among European players. That is a source of synergies and effectiveness, and is essential if they are to keep their rank in the world. And the momentum triggered by France, through her military estimates act (loi de programmation militaire), is also designed to mobilize our manufacturers and our research workers around this forward-looking approach. And to do so within a European context.

The work of the European Convention provides an opportunity to give defence its full place in building political Europe – France, for her part, will ensure this is the case – thereby setting it a new ambition. Which strikes us all as very important.

French Defense/Deterrence/Non-Proliferation

In accordance with the major policy guidelines set out in 1994 – at the time of France's Defence White Paper – our task is to build the new security architecture for our Europe, to bolster the role of the UN, and strengthen bilateral cooperation and the existing defence agreements, thereby promoting the control of armaments and, everywhere in the world, disarmament and the fight against proliferation.

Respect for these international commitments impels us to commit large numbers of men abroad, today more than 20,000 of them. This is a sizeable number, and I would like to pay tribute to them. They are the pride of our country which, across the world, upholds the values of France.

Strengthened by her fundamental strategic choices, France can meet the challenges of an unstable world, on the one hand through deterrence and prevention, and on the other through protection and projection.

Deterrence is at the heart of our country's security. President Chirac recalled, right here – it was in June 2001 – that "our concept of deterrence, founded on the principle of indivisibility, does not rule out the possibility of making it clear to a potential adversary at the appropriate moment that our vital interests are in jeopardy and that we are determined to safeguard them". These assets are tailored to the challenges of our day. Deterrence constitutes our ultimate guarantee in an uncertain world.

Prevention, for its part, means first of all the development of instruments to prevent proliferation. France's commitment to the application and strengthening of those instruments obviously derives from a concern for effectiveness. But I know that those instruments, even today, are imperfect, either in their scope or in their verification machinery. So we need to persuade recalcitrant countries that this is the right road.

Certain aspects still have to be improved. Thus, thanks to France's initiative, a "Code of conduct" on missile proliferation will, I hope, soon be adopted.

The United Nations can and must contribute to this imaginative and resolute approach. Accordingly, President Chirac has proposed that the Security Council meet at head-of-State and government level in 2003. The question of proliferation must be raised and addressed at a level which today truly matches the stakes.

Terrorism/Vigipirate

The effort to afford protection is another response to instability which necessitates a major commitment by the State, but also – and this concerns you – the support of the people and active participation of the whole nation. The Vigipirate plan may sometimes seem restrictive, it must be constantly modernized so it becomes increasingly effective. This does not make it any less essential to the security of our fellow-countrymen.

Today, the fight against terrorism must take on a global dimension.

Because terrorism presents an indiscriminate threat to the vital centres of States, the armed forces and civilian population, the responses to it must cover just as broad a field, embracing action at the political, judicial, police, economic and financial levels. Civilians or military, we are all concerned.

Convinced of this, President Chirac decided, as of last month, that he himself would chair meetings of the Internal Security Council, a body which puts security at the highest level of our institutions, under the authority of the head of State. It has the task of defining policy guidelines in the field of internal security, including the fight against terrorism.

The attacks of 11 September 2001 in the United States highlighted the fundamental importance of intelligence. I want to stress this point because the work of our intelligence services is recognized and I am encouraging them to pursue their work of vigilance and analysis, with an even greater concern for cooperation.

The tragic attack in Karachi reminded us that we could be targeted at any time and in any place. I want here, if I may, to pay tribute to the victims and their families who are today suffering the consequences of that particularly barbaric act.

Defense/Internal Security

Internal security and external security must form a whole. To achieve this, the government has decided to create closer links between France's military defence and security machinery.

The gendarmerie, with its military status, is a good illustration of this necessary continuity of our action. It represents a link between our civilian and military efforts.

All the players must be mobilized. Civilians and the reserve forces are essential partners in any modern defence system.

Our defence needs a dedicated regional organization. While in departments the préfet [a senior civil servant representing the State] is responsible for preparing and implementing civil defence measures, the nation's crisis-response resources are coordinated at defence area level [France is divided into seven zones militaires de défense].

Recent experience has led to the strengthening of the powers of defence area préfets, who can now coordinate these responses more effectively over a wider geographical area, and allocate more effectively the civil and military assets at his/her disposal.

Given the new dimensions of these risks, the role of the Defence Ministry, Defence Minister is obviously a major one.

With its personnel, equipment and know-how, the Ministry has the necessary skill and experience at its command. And I am pleased at the way it has rallied round recently, which gives me the feeling that the whole staff have taken on board the message from President Chirac and the government. Going beyond the Ministry of Defence, all the ministries – Foreign Affairs, Interior, Economy, Finance and Industry, Justice, Health, Agriculture, Transport – all must mobilize, each in its own field.

The coordination of the various State services was already essential. It is now becoming of literally vital importance. I shall keep a particularly close eye on its effective implementation.

The effectiveness of our State services has been strengthened by my government's adoption of three sectoral estimates acts: one for internal security, the second for defence, and the third for justice. The budgetary increases are very significant. But what is perhaps even more significant is that the increases are scheduled to take place over a number of years, so that each of the different players responsible for carrying out these internal and external security policies will really be able to plan ahead. To get these various action programmes under way on a multiannual basis, we had to provide a financial projection. That is what has been done with these outline and estimates acts.

I know that all concerned will see to it that they are properly carried out. I can tell you that this is the intention of the President and the government.

Terrorism/EU/Multilateral Institutions

The European Union and multilateral institutions are also subject to the imperative need for coherence. The fight against terrorism now obviously confronts Europe with the question of its institutions.

We think that the distinction between internal and external security is disappearing in Europe as well as in France, and Europe can no longer address the threats if it maintains the separation between national organizations and this now somewhat historical distinction between the different "pillars".

This increased cooperation will have to be central to the discussions of the European Convention. It is, I believe, very important for us all to think of Europe with this essential concern in mind. For the first time we are in a state of mobilization which today obliges us – the different countries of the EU and the EU itself – to work together on devising a range of responses to the new threats.

Thus, for the first time, major military assets – the naval air group operating from the aircraft carrier "Charles de Gaulle" in the Indian Ocean, Mirage 2000s in Kyrgyzstan – have been committed to operations designed to neutralize a large-scale terrorist network.

The lessons learned from this engagement, and from the Gulf and Balkans wars, have more than ever confirmed the need to have available an autonomous strategic deployment capability, on the ground, in the air and at sea, enabling us rapidly to field first operational units.

French Defense Modernization

This policy demands that we modernize our equipment, in accordance with the guidelines laid down by President Chirac. The necessary effort has now been clearly reflected in the new military estimates act and the 2003 finance bill.

The decision was taken by President Chirac in 1996: the reform of our defence system was designed to modernize our military assets by tailoring them to the new environment and to long-term developments anticipated under the 2015 armed forces model. The 1997-2002 estimates act constituted the first stage of this reform, notably that of establishing fully professional armed forces.

But the funds required for the modernization of our defence equipment were not there. Career soldiers without equipment: this is clearly inadequate. The military and technological capabilities of our armed forces have become weaker, the serviceability of our forces' equipment was in sharp decline. France fell behind the United Kingdom, which harms her ability to make her voice heard.

This is why we have put together the 2003-2008 military estimates bill, which has just been sent to Parliament. It will be presented by Mme Michèle Alliot-Marie, and is designed to consolidate the professionalization of our armed forces and make up the ground we have lost. It will enable us to modernize our equipment, restore its serviceability and give France military assets commensurate with her European commitments. (...)

This national effort must also enable us, acting from a position of greater strength, to promote new industrial partnerships. This momentum is project-driven. It obviously involves all the economic, industrial and technological sectors, and it will prompt us to form new European and international partnerships.

At the Nice and Laeken summits, the European Union took the decision to equip itself as soon as possible with the military, technological and industrial capabilities necessary for a credible and effective European defence.

France feels she is playing her part in the effort to do this. She is determined to contribute to achieving this goal, as is demonstrated by this new military estimates act. Our country will thus be in a position, as of 2006, to sustain the role of "lead nation" in a large-scale operation conducted by the European Union.

Intelligence capabilities, an integral part of command capacity, will be improved by the second-generation Helios satellites, launched in 2004 and 2008 respectively, and by access to the radar satellite observation capabilities of our European partners.

In the field of theatre intelligence too, our capabilities will be enhanced with the commissioning of new airborne sensors and UAVs offering new observation possibilities.

This is why, beyond the improvement of our command and intelligence capabilities, numerous steps will be taken to modernize our armed forces' equipment. These will concern in particular the renewal of the telecommunications space segment, our transport assets with the impatiently-awaited A-400M programme, thorough renovation of our helicopter fleet, ordering of a second aircraft carrier, diversification of cruise missile carriers and strengthening of special forces' intervention capacities.

The army will also have its capacity for action and projection improved. There will also be a modernization of the battlefield surveillance system, work will begin on renewing the surface and submarine fleets, and a theatre antimissile defence component will be developed for the protection of deployed forces.

Finally and above all, the maintenance of equipment already in service – this is important, of course, today a lot of equipment is not in running order, and we regret it – this is why we have made this effort to get our forces' equipment back up to a satisfactory level of serviceability.

Ministry of Defence personnel has been reduced in the past six years because of the professionalization of the armed forces. But the real challenge of this transformation now is to recruit career soldiers, capable year after year of taking part in this defence effort. We shall rise to it.

This is why the 2003-2008 military estimates act makes provision for the recruitment at the proper level, and making full use of their skills and know-how, of all those capable of participating in this national defence effort. (…) ./.