I see France's withdrawal from NATO in 1996 as a typically French move. The French put French interests first. I'm not castigating the French for doing so. Unlike many Americans, I don't believe that our allies have to be our lap dogs. Whatever one believes about the Gallic insistence on maintaining independence of action, I believe the French withdrawal from NATO in 1996 makes perfect sense--from the French point of view. West Germany's invasion of the DDR with NATO standing on the sidelines can be seen as a local action. Lamentable, oui. Deserving of nuclear action against France? Non. When US forces cross the border, however, the West German invasion of East Germany becomes a NATO invasion of Pact turf. Someone in the French hierarchy clearly concludes that there is less chance of Soviet nuclear attack on French targets if France is neutral than if France is still a part of the Atlantic Alliance.
Sadly, I rather doubt the French attempts at neutrality buy them much. EMP will affect France as much as any other Western European nation. Most French electricity is nuclear derived. That's a problem in a nuclear environment. It's also hard to see that the Soviets would permit French industry to survive in an East-West nuclear exchange intended to put the West out of the fight.
Webstral
|