By: Paige Rohe

Going to war, in the days before the United Nations, used to be a lot easier.
Leaders would get upset about this or that insult, and throw down the gauntlet
quicker than the Lone Ranger could say “draw.” Now, the United Nations'
Security Council is there to save the day when tensions between world leaders
get ugly. A peace-keeper made up of representatives from every region in the
world, the Security Council has the weighty burden of deciding who has the
‘right’ to engage in conflict during a hostile international situation.
Unfortunately for the Bush Administration, the system appears to be working
only too well. Has this Frankenstein's monster finally turned upon its creator?

President Bush has said he doesn’t care whether we get international permission
to invade Iraq from Cameroon, Angola, Chile or anyone for that matter. However,
the truth is, despite what we say, international political opinion does matter,
and it’s a major prerogative of the United States to look as righteous as
possible whenever possible. So we put on a coat and tie, muster all our good
faith, and head over to the UN. It’s a very serious mission seeking out the
blessing of the United Nations’ Security Council, to do what we were going to
do anyway.

The cog in the wheel of the US plan is that getting the green light from five
members (after Spain and the UK jumped on our bandwagon) is proving more
difficult than we thought. Ah, the beauty of the new international order, where
even little guys like Angola get a chance to step on the big guy on the block
after years of back-breaking subservience to the US’s political, economic, and
military world domination.  But what about those other guys, our allies at the
end of World War II? You remember, the ones to whom we gave chocolate bars and
bubble gum as we marched through their streets? Well tried and true Britain is
still sticking by us, but Dear Old France, has jumped to the other side of the
fence.

The big surprise is that France would rather side with its twice-foe, Germany,
than its twice-friend, the US. We gave them Jerry Lewis and jazz. They gave us
Brie and bottled water. A marriage made in heaven? Apparently not.

In reality, since the dawn of the European Union and the social, economic, and
political cohesion that has resulted in Europe, you can’t even say that France
and Germany are so very separate from each other now. They still have very
different languages, cultures, and even interior political systems, but they
share the same currency, have representatives in the same European Parliament,
and their citizens are no longer just French or just German. They are also, and
perhaps more importantly, citizens of a new, more unified Europe.  

Well, our President stomps his foot and hollers words of “justice” and
“freedom” at his perceived betrayal. The  American people, especially those
whose grandfathers handed out the Hershey bars, they didn’t just get angry,
they got even. While the rest of the world is busy protesting Bush’s lack of
international support, the Baby Boomin’ generation and their kids have
re-named French fries, “Freedom fries.”  

Of course, we can’t allow those Frenchies to profit off  of us every time we go
out for a burger! The logic would make more sense if the French government
actually owned a copyright or even held a special attachment to the fact that
they have fried potatoes named after them. -But we shouldn’t let such minor
details get in the way of the bigger picture: The Statue of Liberty is French
and we need to send her back.


Bill O’Reilly, of Fox News’s “O’Reilly Factor,” even recommends that we start
boycotting Motel 6 (owned by a French corporation), adding his support to the
actions of many who have already stopped drinking Eviane and eating brie. Take
that France! Don’t support US military intervention in Iraq  and you’re entire
economy will suffer as we sip Californian Merlot or Canadian bottled water,
poolside at the Days Inn!

Should Americans really feel so very betrayed by France? If it fulfills some
psychological need to release your frustration by lashing out at something
entirely irrelevant as French fries, go ahead. But does this accomplish
anything? Perhaps an embargo of French products would force the French to
tighten their belt, and think twice before thumbing their noses at us again,
but we’d be doing potentially more damage to ourselves than good. The French
aren’t going to just sit across the Atlantic and continue to purchase
American-made goods while we send theirs back by the boatload.

Even worse is the possibility that thousands of Americans, employed by
French-owned but American-based companies could be laid off as a result of such
a boycott. In this economy, who knows whether the majority of these casualties
of America’s temper-tantrum would be able to find jobs.  Finally, look at the
opposition to war in our own country. Thousands across our great 50 states have
protested war on Iraq. If the US is so divided about war, how can we look in
anger to other countries that may actually be supporting the feelings of many
Americans? For all we know, many French could be just as misrepresented by
their government as it seems many Americans are. 

Paige Rohe is an International Studies student at Emory University and a contributing writer for PurePolitics.com. She can be reached at feedback@purepolitics.com.

Past Columns: 1, 2, 3, 4