What Chirac said about deterrence - published in the "Financial Times" newspaper

Sir, Nuclear deterrence is a serious matter and as such demands rigorous analysis. Yet the four points Wolfang Munchau developed in his article “Chirac’s vain threat is a strategic mess” (January 23) are erroneous. First, President Chirac has never talked about the use of a nuclear weapon in the context of the fight against terrorism. Nuclear deterrence was not and is not designed to prevent the threat represented by terrorist groups. It is directed only against States. As President Chirac said, "any leaders of States using terrorist means against us (...) must understand that they lay themselves open to a firm and appropriate response on our part." It seems to us wholly justified that such States know that our action may involve a range of capabilities, conventional or otherwise. The uncertainty in the mind of any potential aggressor regarding the response to which he lays himself open is the basic principle of nuclear deterrence. I am surprised that Mr Munchau seemed unaware of it. Second, it is quite wrong to say that the President threatened any country whatsoever.

Third, President Chirac’s speech in no way "amounts to a setback for a common European foreign policy". In a speech on 8 June 2001, President Chirac had already said that France considered that the assessment of any attack against its vital interests "would of course take account of the growing solidarity among the countries of the European Union". On January 19 2006, he simply reaffirmed, in very clear and specific terms, France’s firm determination "to consider the possibility of a common defence that would take account of existing deterrent forces". What is wrong with that?

Finally, as regards any supposed damage to the Franco-German relationship, I can only quote what the German Chancellor, said during her joint press conference with President Chirac in Versailles on January 23: "what President Chirac said is fully consistent with the long-standing French nuclear doctrine. We know that France is a country with a nuclear capability, a nuclear capability which exists exclusively for the purpose of deterrence. And for me there is nothing here to criticize. Given the emergence of new threats or changes in the threat, under such circumstances adapting the doctrine is perfectly understandable. But even adapting this doctrine is fully in line with its permanency". No disagreement was displayed on this occasion.

Gérard Errera

Ambassador of France to the UK