AFP, PARIS (AFP) Oct 30, 2003-France's nuclear defense strategy has not changed since 2001 but the context in which it is applied has altered due to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the defense ministry said Thursday.
“There is no new strategy,” ministry spokesman Jean-Francois Bureau told reporters. “What has changed is the environment, the context, in which this deterrence strategy exists. Not the tools, not the concept.”
On Monday, the left-leaning Liberation newspaper reported that President Jacques Chirac was planning in the next few weeks to redefine France's policy of nuclear deterrence, something his office immediately denied.
Liberation said the Cold War logic of possessing nuclear weapons — so France could maintain independence from the United States in the face of the Soviet threat — appeared to have lived its day.
“Now the French striking force targets, without naming any particular country, what the Americans call 'rogue states',” the paper said.
The French defense ministry spokesman insisted that no policy shift was on the cards and that any “evolution” in policy had been caused by changing circumstances.
Bureau said France's concept of nuclear dissuasion remained that set out by Chirac in a speech in June 2001.
Chirac said in the speech the deterrence theory, under which atomic weapons ensure peace through the threat of devastating retaliation, allowed France “to face threats which might be brought to bear on our vital interests from regional powers armed with weapons of mass destruction”. That was interpreted to mean rogue states.
“If they are driven by hostile intentions towards us, the leaders of such states must know that they would expose themselves to harm that they would find totally unacceptable,” Chirac warned.
Bureau stressed: “We have a strategy that is adapted to our situation, our capabilities, our assessment of the risks and our definition of our vital interests.”
“We are not preparing to wage a classic nuclear battle like some might imagine. Deterrence remains a concept of political ends served by military means.”
