THE UN: The French have long been a thorn in the side of the Americans when it comes to foreign policy. No more so than now at the UN Security Council,writes Lara Marlowe in Paris
Sooner or later, every US president is infuriated by two countries, France and Israel, an old adage has it. In the case of Mr George Bush, the saying is only half true. Washington regards Paris as the main obstacle in its quest for a UN Security Council resolution enabling it to attack Iraq, and tension between the two capitals has risen sharply this week.
Ireland's emphasis on the primacy of the Security Council and the early return of weapons inspectors places Dublin closer to Paris than Washington. The Foreign Minister, Mr Cowen, said this week: "This Government is of the view that any decision to deploy military force in the event of continued Iraqi non-compliance must be taken by the Security Council."
Yesterday's Le Monde reports that Ireland supports the French position, although Dublin also wants a stricter inspection system. If this is confirmed by an Irish statement, in American eyes, Dublin risks sharing the opprobrium with Paris.
By contrast, the Israeli-American honeymoon continues. On Wednesday, after Mr Bush and Prime Minister Mr Ariel Sharon met for the seventh time since both came to power, Mr Sharon boasted that Israel's relations with the US had never been better.
In 1991, Mr Bush's father asked Israel not to retaliate for the Iraqi scud missiles launched against it. This week, the son said the Israelis could defend themselves, both against Iraq and the Lebanese Hizbullah. With a crisis mounting over Lebanon's use of the Wazzani River waters, Mr Bush's "green light" held special significance.
France has input also in the Israeli-Lebanese conflict, having sent technical experts to assess the dispute over the river. The ninth summit of La Francophonie in Beirut over the next two days gives President Jacques Chirac the chance to reaffirm France's role as a friend to the Arabs, and the only alternative to US-Israeli domination of the Middle East.
On his way to Beirut, Mr Chirac stopped in Alexandria, Egypt, to inaugurate a magnificent new library built with French funds. "This region does not need another war if it can be avoided," he said, alluding to Iraq. "Avoiding it would be in the interest of the region, of morality and of a certain concept of international order where everyone is respected.
"If we don't manage it, France, as a member of the Security Council, and a permanent member, will assume its responsibilities." It was not clear whether Mr Chirac meant that France would use its veto against a US resolution, or that France would endorse the use of force against Baghdad, or both.
France - and other Security Council members who oppose unilateral action - face a dilemma. Five weeks after Mr Bush's speech at the UN, hardliners in the Bush administration threaten to form a coalition to act outside the Security Council if the UN body does not reach agreement soon. The "E-10" temporary members would prefer that the five permanent members agreed a draft resolution rather than place them in the awkward position of arbiters.
Paris made a significant concession at the beginning of the week, when it agreed that the resolution still under negotiation could mention the use of force. The US Secretary of State, Mr Colin Powell, said France had put forward "new ideas".
But French officials say they can go no further; the Security Council alone must decide if Baghdad is in breach of resolutions, and if so, what measures should be taken.