• Published 21:56 10.09.09
  • Latest update 22:04 10.09.09

French army chief: Military strike on Iran not viable

Frank military assessment on Iran appears to go beyond recent public comments by French officials.

By The Associated Press Tags: Iran France Israel news

The head of the French military said Thursday that military intervention is no longer a viable option to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear capability.

French chief-of-staff Gen. Jean-Louis Georgelin said following a speech that he believes a military operation would be too risky.

"It is very difficult to plan a military operation in Iran, because we are not sure that we are able to solve a problem in one shot and if you fail in one shot, it is a catastrophe," he said in English. "I don't think at this stage a military option is still available."

Georgelin was answering a question after a speech at the Atlantic Council in Washington on France's new relationship with NATO and stressed that the comment was his opinion.

Georgelin was in the United States to attend a ceremony Wednesday as French Gen. Stephane Abrial became the first non-American officer to permanently fill a NATO command post. The new position followed France's decision this year to return to NATO's military command, a decision-making body within the U.S. dominated alliance.

The frank military assessment on Iran appeared to go beyond recent public comments by French officials.

President Nicolas Sarkozy has taken a tougher line on Iran than his predecessor, and hitched himself closer to the American position. Sarkozy startled diplomatic circles when in 2007 he mentioned the possibility of military intervention. He said he wanted to avoid a catastrophic alternative: an Iranian bomb, or the bombing of Iran if diplomacy fails.

Soon afterward, Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said the world should prepare for the worst in Iran, specifically war.

Since U.S. President Barack Obama took office in January, both Sarkozy and Kouchner have generally shied away from publicly discussing the prospect of war in Iran.

Georgelin said that he believes economic and political pressure will be more effective than military action in Iran.

"At this stage, my personal opinion is that for Iran I fear that the military option is probably beyond us and that the action should be as our president said several times in acting on financial pressure, economic pressure, political pressure," he said.

Georgelin also noted the importance of close coordination with Israel in order not to let it strike alone with all the risks it could entail.

  • Print Page
  • Send to a friend
  • Share
  • Text Size +|-
 
 
TalkBacks

Why Facebook Connect?

Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.

Add a comment

Add your reply

  • 57. 0 0
    The US should not help
    • Phillip
    • 14.11.09
    • 07:02

    The US should make it clear that we will not help Israel bomb Iran and drag us into another Mideast war. Obama should pubilicly say that Israel has a right to defend itself but that the US will let them fight it out between themselves if Israel starts it. I do not think Israel would act alone if they knew they had to finish what they started.

  • 56. 0 0
    If Iran nukes Israel
    • Israeliguy
    • 21.10.09
    • 00:44

    which is a small country, they will take out the not only Israel but the West Bank and Gaza too. Did I forget to mention the Al Aqsa compound too?? the mullahs will face the mother of all fatwas and jihads against Shiites will be rife, and dont forget next door is another Sunni Muslim country Pakistan with their own nukes, if everybody got upset by Ariel Sharon visiting Al Aqsa imagine if it go's up in a mushroom cloud courtesy of an Iranian Shahab armed with a Nuclear warhead. The entire Muslim world will be outraged not at the Israeli deaths but the loss of Al Aqsa and the Palestinian death toll too. Not even the mad mullahs are that stupid.

  • 55. 0 0
    french military
    • captain grumpy
    • 15.09.09
    • 15:39

    The French built the Arch Of Triumph (not french) and it is fact that france has not won a war since it was built. They left Africa,Vietman and the middle east after starting a war in these places,but has never stayed to fight.

  • 54. 0 0
    Strike on Iran
    • joegoldenberg
    • 11.09.09
    • 22:21

    As usual French Authority is not able to adopt a strong standpoint. Whatever it was for Serbia, for the 2nd world war, do not act and wait. To wait or to say too much risk, has been always the French standpoint. There is no collective memory and pass the ball to the other. Very easy to be polite.

  • 53. 0 0
    Repetition
    • The Teacher/Instruct
    • 11.09.09
    • 09:12

    Military Strike. In more than one post I have repeatedly stated that it's not Israel's businrss to pull the chstnuts out of the fire for the likes of the lazy Europeans! The real prize is Europe & not little Israel,where there are about 20% Arabs,& the two Mosques.They might all turn into cinders. Have you thought of that!? But Europe,a vast jig-saw of countries, interests & tongues is a succulent, half-rotten fruit ready to be plucked! Without America's help Europe will go to the dogs!

  • 52. 0 0
    French military provess is only surpassed by the Swedish one
    • Mark Lincoln
    • 11.09.09
    • 07:52

    "French military provess is only surpassed by the Swedish one." - Absolute Sweden Was Sweden overrun by Germany as Norway was? Was Sweden allied with Germany as Finland was? Did not Sweden avoid submission of it's national goals to either the US or Soviet Union during the Cold War? Is not Sweden capable of providing for it's own defense? Is Sweden not the ONLY European nation capable of developing and producing a first-rate fighter aircraft by itself? Sweden remains what France wished to be, an INDEPENDENT nation, capable of defending itself. Too bad it does not live up to your delusions of grander 'Absolute Sweden.

  • 51. 0 0
    Like Duh Dude!
    • Mark Lincoln
    • 11.09.09
    • 07:45

    First one would have to know exact details about ALL facilities, yet neither the US or Israel has yet to reveal any facility to the IAEA which proved to be a nuclear facility. Thus it is clear they have no clue about the supposed' secret' program. Second, any strike would have to be comprehensive, taking out everything in a single effort. Third, even eliminating all known facilities would not eliminate the technology, and would ensure that IAEA 'spies' would not be given knowledge of, or access to, the inevitable subsequent facilities. Thus any attack intended to destroy Iran's nuclear program would only ensure that a nuclear weapons program would be developed, and that it would be hidden from monitoring. And, any attack on Iran would produce another war in the mideast. Given that the US is overmatched in the region, and Israel cannot take out a fraction of Iran's military capability without US help. . . Only lunatics or imbeciles would pursue a war.

  • 50. 0 0
    Eli, didja see France volunteerin'? Nope...
    • BBSNews
    • 11.09.09
    • 07:38

    ...and selling an Iran attack for Israel to us Americans ain't gonna happen no matter how much you wish it. The EU or Britain sure ain't gonna do it... I *was* focusing on the phrase "strike" alone. And France has joined a world consensus in telling Israel to *not* strike on its own. It's crystal clear.

  • 49. 0 0
    reason behind French general's opinion
    • Neville Chamberlain
    • 11.09.09
    • 05:16

    the Iranians have already started tunneling into mountains to built bunkers(for their centrifuges) that are impervious to bunker busters. (note Cheshire cat-like grin on Ahmadinejad's face)

  • 48. 0 0
    Gotta love that last line!
    • Johnboy
    • 11.09.09
    • 05:10

    "Georgelin also noted the importance of close coordination with Israel in order not to let it strike alone with all the risks it could entail." Nah, let Israel launch itself on Iran. It'll be a valuable lesson in the consequences of hubris. Pity about all the dead, of course, but at least everyone will know who is responsible. So just stand back and let Netanyahu order those F-16's into the air, and if the war doesn't go the way the IDF expected, well, that'll be Bibi's problem, not yours.

  • 47. 0 0
    BBSNews _ Read That Quotation In Your Post Again
    • Eli
    • 11.09.09
    • 04:07

    And maybe you will change your mind about what it says. Concentrate on: "close coordination with Israel in order not to let it STRIKE ALONE with all the risks it could entail." Read that again..."NOT TO LET IT STRIKE ALONE". Again, concentrate on STRIKE ALONE!!! And you think you can read, write, interpret, think, and express opinions?

  • 46. 0 0
    Ben
    • Neil
    • 11.09.09
    • 04:02

    Ben said Lets give Iran an ultimatum... either accept our demands or taste our nukes! Ben. You, an dpeople like you, are the very reason that Iran should have Nuclear weapons. Mutually Assured Destruction will mean that neither Iran or Israel will attack. When you winde your genocidal retoric, then I would change my mind. Until then. . . Best Wishes

  • 45. 0 0
    MILITARY OPTION
    • X-MILITARY
    • 11.09.09
    • 03:57

    We can all rest assured that when the chief of the military states that a military option is not possible, then it is certain that the military plans for such an option have been put in place all the necessary attack units are in position and all that is necessary is the final order from the same military chief to start the military option

  • 44. 0 0
  • 43. 0 0
    DUH. LIKE WE DIDN'T SEE THIS COMING
    • SHMUEL IN GALUT
    • 11.09.09
    • 03:38

    BIG SURPRISE FROM THE BRAVE FRENCH. Good thing their Muslim population isn't burning cars and garbage this summer. They couldn't handle that, much less an international invasion.

  • 42. 0 0
    Axel _ When Did Germany Win A War?
    • Eli
    • 11.09.09
    • 03:36

    Canada helped defeat Germany twice....within a quarter of a century mind you. I will grant you this! You have every right to ask questions and not be a very proud German. Ta ta for now.

  • 41. 0 0
    Axel _ When Did Germany Win A War?
    • Eli
    • 11.09.09
    • 03:36

    Canada helped defeat Germany twice....within a quarter of a century mind you. I will grant you this! You have every right to ask questions and not be a very proud German. Ta ta for now.

  • 40. 0 0
    HUGO CHAVEZ WILL BREAK ANY IRANIAN BLOCKADE BY USA OR ISRAEL
    • JOHN BROWN OF KANSAS
    • 11.09.09
    • 03:35

    HUGO CHAVEZ IS NOT AFRAID OF ISRAELI THUGGERY.

  • 39. 0 0
    France never waged war on unarmed civilians
    • Marc Leb
    • 11.09.09
    • 03:29

    That's the difference between France and Israel. I love these comments on how France shouldn't be able to talk, And for you American Fascist Zionist Jews who still pander the holocaust anytime you can = The French suffered just as much in WW2 as the Jews in Germany. Oh and the last time Israel was involved with a skirmish with Hezbollah, they suffered a defeat, imagine them against Iran HAH - your arrogance will be your downfall

  • 38. 0 0
    Sam H needs a reality check
    • Christopher
    • 11.09.09
    • 03:28

    If it wasn't for the US, not only France, but all of Western Europe would be speaking German and boot stepping to a variety of Wagner symphonies.

  • 37. 0 0
    Maginot line?
    • Boris
    • 11.09.09
    • 03:27

    Hahaha! This from a nation that built the Maginot line and got out flanked twice in two world wars. Plus half the country sided with the Germans. Maybe Israel should build a Maginot line instead?

  • 36. 0 0
    Original Patent
    • Arie
    • 11.09.09
    • 03:27

    It is well known that France, which hasn't won a war since the early years of Napoleon and whose famed Foreign Legion has NEVER won a battle, invented the white flag of surrender. Not only that, but they have recently upgraded the invention with a new technologically improved automatic raising of the flag at the approach of any hostile entity, foreign or domestic,

  • 35. 0 0
    Just accept reality for once, OK?
    • Johnboy
    • 11.09.09
    • 03:03

    Nobody wants to whack Iran except Israel. N.O.B.O.D.Y. So if Israel is so paranoid about Iran that it insists Iran **must** be whacked then the IDF has to do it, and it has to do it on its own. So load up the bunker busters, rev up the jet engines, and let those F-16's fly. Take you best shot, and accept the consequences if your best shot isn't good enough..... The kudos will all be yours, and yours alone. So will the brickbats.

  • 34. 0 0
    French General
    • Brod
    • 11.09.09
    • 02:13

    Not surprising. France has NO experience in this kind of operation.

  • 33. 0 0
    BBS News #20; Why would Israel attack Iran?
    • Murray of Montreal
    • 11.09.09
    • 02:05

    The country is going to implode along with Lebanon and eventually Syria as well.

  • 32. 0 0
    #18 Axel
    • Art
    • 11.09.09
    • 01:54

    Axel - from Germany! - asks when Canada won its last war. How about WW1 and WW2. Against Germany. Nor was Canada a mere 'auxilary to real armies.' Over 600,000 Canadians served in WW1, and the Canadian Corps defeated the Germans in numerous engagements, most famously at Vimy Ridge. Over 1 million Canadians served in WW2, and Canada ended the war with the third largest navy in the world. Canada has never lost a war. Germany has lost every war it's fought since German unification in 1870.

  • 31. 0 0
    Maybe So
    • Les Lyshkov
    • 11.09.09
    • 01:49

    If you listen ... and they do speak softly ... both American & Russian military men say much the same.

  • 30. 0 0
    Doesn't France have an independent opinion??
    • Isaac
    • 11.09.09
    • 01:26

    Looks like France looks West to Washington for advice on how what to say in public!

  • 29. 0 0
    B.S.News (# 20), the "time's up" wingnut speaks.
    • flyingdoc57
    • 11.09.09
    • 01:24

    "There will be no Israel attack on Iran." Pardon me, oh mighty Nostradamus-of-the-Cherokee-tribe, but wasn't it you who spewed out the words "time's up" for years before finally coming to terms with the fact that you were wrong? Whether or not there will be an attack on Iran depends solely on Iran. One thing, however, is clear. Iran will not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. Even your hero, the Muslim idiot illegally occupying our White House, has said so. You certainly wouldn't declare Obama mistaken when he repeatedly declares that the prospect of a nuclear Iran is "intolerable", would you? BTW, did you happen to notice the part of the article which reads "Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said the world should prepare for the worst in Iran, specifically war."? Oops! "Time's up", wingnut.

  • 28. 0 0
    Come on Israel!
    • JD
    • 11.09.09
    • 00:38

    Give it a try! See what happens! Cook or get out of the kitchen!

  • 27. 0 0
    Perhaps he meant that a French attack was not viable?
    • Murray de Montreal
    • 11.09.09
    • 00:22

    Can anyone recall the last war that France won by themselves? The only one that I can recall was the French Revolution but in that the French defeated the French!

  • 26. 0 0
    then allowing them to attain nukes was a huge error
    • Avi
    • 11.09.09
    • 00:17

    Meaning that whatever diplomatic avenues have been explored have totally failed and now the world will suffer the consequences. I told you so's mean nothing now...

  • 25. 0 0
    Now Israel has lost France's support for an Iran attack...
    • BBSNews
    • 11.09.09
    • 00:03

    ...and you gotta love that last line: "Georgelin also noted the importance of close coordination with Israel in order not to let it strike alone with all the risks it could entail." There will be no Israel attack on Iran.

  • 24. 0 0
    BUNCH OF COWARDS - IRAN LAUGHS
    • Bung
    • 11.09.09
    • 00:02

    I wonder what this bunch of cowards will do when Iran hurls a nuke. Here's a clue. They'll want more dialogue while Iran must laugh at this outfit. More than one saw this coming and it has been stated right on this site in the comments. Pacifism leads to total defeat. Be happy that this attitude did not reign before the 1st and 2nd World Wars. This leaves Israel on its own of course, and if Israel buckles to this fouled up thinking, it's Israel that will pay the ultimate price guaranteed.

  • 23. 0 0
    # 5 ben
    • Axel
    • 11.09.09
    • 00:01

    "when france can win a war" When did Canada win its last war? I mean on its own, not as an auxiliary to real armies.

  • 22. 0 0
  • 21. 0 0
    #2 ben
    • Axel
    • 10.09.09
    • 23:59

    "Lets give Iran an ultimatum... either accept our demands or taste our nukes!" You are obviously completely mad. The equation still stands: nuke first, die second.

  • 20. 0 0
    If it wasn't for the US France would be speaking German!
    • Sam H.
    • 10.09.09
    • 23:51

    who in there right mind would take military advise from France ?

  • 19. 0 0
    Reality strikes (we all know this! even the Israelis)
    • Historian
    • 10.09.09
    • 23:51

    This is a fact - Iran will get DA BOMB! There is no stopping it anymore - it is too late - in 15 years there will be a war to end all wars in the middle east then the Mahdi will come as the whole lands of the arabia and Palestine and Persia are radio active. Boy, Christian Europe and America is going to look REALLY GOOD!

  • 18. 0 0
    7pal. "would make a real peace with my neighbors today?"
    • blind leading blind?
    • 10.09.09
    • 23:49

    With whom? Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, or it seems lately, with AlQaeda of Gaza? In any event, Iran/mullahs do not really care about about Israel, Palestinian Arabs. This is just a useful tool to get the Arab masses to support their ultimate goal of Iranian mideast supremacy. Doubt it? Ask the leaders of the Gulf states, Egypt, Jordan, etc.. When o' when will the Arabs/Pals wake up and see who their real enemies are? "We have met the enemy, and he is us." - Walt Kelly /Pogo.

  • 17. 0 0
    Ben in Toronto
    • Eaglebeak
    • 10.09.09
    • 23:45

    Ben, You said it perfectly.

  • 16. 0 0
    coalition attack
    • oxo
    • 10.09.09
    • 23:45

    Would be nice to see a coalition be put together to solve this problem with the military solution...Europe and the Americas must nip this problem in the bud

  • 15. 0 0
    Palestinian
    • Eaglebeak
    • 10.09.09
    • 23:44

    If you were a strategic decision maker in Israel you would know that Israel's neighbors don't want peace. If they had wanted peace they never would have lost territory to Israel in the first place. The only thing you guys seem to understand and respect is brute force. You can use that approach on your enemies but when they use it on you then you cry about it.

  • 14. 0 0
    Re 7 Some suggestions palestinian please
    • alan the real one
    • 10.09.09
    • 23:41

    How does one make a real peace with the mad mullahs and their clients Hamas and Hezbollah. . That is the linchpin. And please don't suggest that Israel give back territory and trust the good will of Iran an its clients.

  • 13. 0 0
    Common sense?
    • Manny Goldstein
    • 10.09.09
    • 23:39

    How many times will it be said, a military strike would not work!

  • 12. 0 0
    Re 6 Not true realist.
    • alan the real one
    • 10.09.09
    • 23:37

    The French did not strike against an emerging Nazi Germany because of their confidence in the Maginot line. They did not attack Germany because of the trauma of WW1 was still fresh in their minds. In fact there was a feeling in France in some quarters that they would have prefered to live under German hegemony rather then feed bodies into the meat grinder of another war. It seems like there is still that lingering fear that permeates the French mindset.

  • 11. 0 0
    "Palestinian" 7 listen to experts who only know how to lose wars?
    • Realist
    • 10.09.09
    • 23:35

    If you think that Israel is going to listen to the advice of experts who only know how to lose wars and deport Jews to Auschwitz then you have another think coming.

  • 10. 0 0
    Absolute Sweden, it is you who called Ashkenazi a "social worker"
    • christoph
    • 10.09.09
    • 23:28

    ...and worse: it made me laugh (although it isn't really funny with Gaza in ruins). Maybe I like a certain kind of chutzpe even if I don't always share the message.

  • 9. 0 0
    Surprise, surprise, surprise
    • John
    • 10.09.09
    • 23:23

    The whole world will sit on their butts while Israel gets threatened and then destroyed and then they will simply say its too bad. If any country including France was facing destruction they would take action. We have had at least 5 years of threats from Iran now its time to act

  • 8. 0 0
    Vive la France!
    • peter
    • 10.09.09
    • 22:57

    France surrender before the action start...

  • 7. 0 0
    Israel should listen to the advise of experts & stop the insanity
    • palestinian
    • 10.09.09
    • 22:35

    israel is sadly mistaken if it thinks there is more to gain than lose in conducting a strike on iran's nuclear program. most experts agree that israel will suffer a catastrophic setback if it engaged in such irresponsible military activities. If I were a strategic decision-maker in israel, I would make a real peace with my neighbors today and return the occupied territories, rather than lose everything down the road.

  • 6. 0 0
    France is still hiding behind the Maginot line
    • Realist
    • 10.09.09
    • 22:28

    France did not think a military strike on Nazi Germany was viable either and therefore decided to hide behind the Maginot line. It does not seem that this French general has learned anything from the real catastrophe which followed.

  • 5. 0 0
    when france can win a war...
    • ben
    • 10.09.09
    • 22:26

    then we will ask them whats militarily possible...

  • 4. 0 0
    "...coordination with Israel?" Will Israel rely on Georgelin?...
    • bat yam
    • 10.09.09
    • 22:23

    It is hard to soar like an eagle when you fly with turkeys.

  • 3. 0 0
    French army chief
    • Albrecht Klein
    • 10.09.09
    • 22:20

    It's not France that is going to be destroyed by Iran. It's Israel.

  • 2. 0 0
    lesser of two evils...
    • ben
    • 10.09.09
    • 22:12

    How many will die if we do nothing to stop Iran? How many will die if we do something to stop Iran? Lets give Iran an ultimatum... either accept our demands or taste our nukes! At this point presision military strikes will do nothing... Lets make Pankakes... America will add the milk and Iran will be the batter...

  • 1. 0 0
    French military provess is only surpassed by the Swedish one
    • Absolute Sweden
    • 10.09.09
    • 22:02

    That's why military opinions of those 2 countries are so highly valued. Ok ,perhaps the Swiss General Staff should also be asked for an advice.