Intelligence: A (well) forewarned government is forearmed. Therefore, counter-terrorism warfare is better waged with competent intelligence services, providing political authorities effectively make good use of the collected information before making the right decisions. In our Western democracies, intelligence is "a means and not an end" as Bruno Delamotte reminds us in his latest book: "Question(s) d'intelligence: le renseignement face au terrorisme" (A question of wits: intelligence vs terrorism), published on 8 May 2004 by Éditions Michalon; this is a book that will not leave intelligence professionals unmoved. The author compares the French intelligence services and the way they are operated with the huge resources at the disposal of the American federal agencies. Bénédicte Suzan, a researcher at the Fondation Méditerranéenne d'Études Stratégiques and co-author, with Jeremy Shapiro, Associate Director of the famous Brookings Institution's Center on the United States and Europe, of several studies on counter-terrorism in France and in Europe, gives us a critical review of this book. Meanwhile, in Bavaria, invited by the Hanns-Seidel Foundation, the experts of 15 countries have been meeting at Wildbad Kreuth Castle to compare their problems and experience in this critical domain and to make the ongoing reforms more appropriate and intelligence-gathering more offensive.

Motion pictures and politics: On 22 May 2004, the United States won the Golden Palm at the 57^th Cannes film festival. Michael Moore thus renewed the achievement of Jacques-Yves Cousteau and Louis Malle when they won this top prize in 1956 with their documentary on "The Silent World". This director is now assured that his "Fahrenheit 9/11" film will be released in the States. By censoring Michael Moore, Mickey has made him together a victim and a celebrity. Whatever the fraction of truth in this film, it has the indisputable merit of exposing some shameful relationships between the political and business worlds, disquieting relationships that mix American and Saudi interests. However, the stated intent of making it an "anti-Bush documentary" and the presence of José Bové next to Michael Moore in Cannes, notwithstanding the fact that some of the American members of the jury are known for their "political commitment", all that obliges us to cast a critical look at this documentary film. The golden rule requires that facts and comments be separated. Furthermore, "photography steps into the war", as François-Bernard Huyghe writes in a column published in the daily Libération. "America has reached a point where it cannot control the self-image it wants to give the world". With all his well-known skill, the director of the Observatoire d'infostratégie explains that due to "the Arabian satellite TV networks, the Net or its own media, America has lost control of what is visible, and therefore credible, in this conflict. The proof by the picture turns against the society of pictures in its struggle 'to win the hearts and minds of men'…".

For all these reasons, the country that invented Hollywood is in the process of losing the information war. A war that in Iraq is waged at three levels: military, mediatic, and symbolic. Naturally, one can reflect on war in general and the war in Iraq in particular, but is the situation in Afghanistan brighter? François-Bernard Huyghe turns very pessimistic on the reasons that, in the long haul, make this Fourth World War impossible to win and peace impossible to contemplate. This famous GWOT (Global War on Terrorism) was supposed together to get rid of these famous Weapons of Mass Destruction and to restore democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq! To this end, one should use the right means and this together with the greatest possible number of countries. When one uses the services of sorcerer's apprentices, of propaganda teams or of consultants specialized in "government communication" that act as substitutes for the official services instead of advocating transparency in the country of democracy, one can expect the soufflé to deflate one day in Washington as it has already done in London. "Wishful thinking" will never replace facts.

Now for a genuine American critique on the substance, devoid of political ulterior motives, and explaining the ten major mistakes made in Iraq, some of which being all the more unforgivable that they mere predictable, the comments made on 12 May 2004 by General Anthony Zinni are a real indictment. A hero of the Vietnam War, General Schwarzkopf's successor, who has been a special Middle East envoy for some time, has parted with the Bush administration following the start of the war in Iraq. This is obviously not the first time a general officer, disgusted by what he deems "a disaster", voices his opinion loud and clear. However, it is the first time a former commander of the Marine Corps is calling for the resignation of his overseeing Minister and entourage. In a book published on 24 May 2004 and written together with Tom Clancy and Tony Koltz, the former Commander in Chief of US Central Command from 1997 to 2000 writes, speaking of those who organized and conducted this war in Iraq: "I saw, at minimum, true dereliction, negligence and irresponsibility; at worst, lying, incompetence and corruption." In the 13 May issue of the daily "Le Monde", François-Bernard Huyghe posed this root question: "How does the hyperpower become the hyper target? The American enemy-making machine and the Arab and Muslim resentment machine are on the same wavelength. The former provides the latter with a battle area, grievances, objectives, and motivations for recruitment. The latter provides the former with food for its paranoia: we must do away with "liberty haters". And the result is called permanent war.

As for Weapons of Mass Destruction, the Swedish ambassador Hans Blix, being a fine diplomat, does not go to the extent of saying that George Bush and Tony Blair have lied to us, but that they have misled us. The nuance is important. "Lying would mean they would have done so consciously. I have no proof to contend that. Where I would be more severe, it's because they did not exercise enough critical judgment. If they had, they would have been more careful with their wording." Stopping over in Paris, the UN chief weapons inspector, who is publishing a book on "Irak: les Armes introuvables" ("Disarming Iraq: The Search for Weapons of Mass Destruction") at Éditions Fayard, did not conceal his feeling to Christian Malar. In any case, this book provides a good insight on the American intentions to intervene in Iraq, with or without the UN.

By the way, has this 4^th W.W. really started on 11 September 2001 ? In a speech which attracted considerable attention, delivered at the George Washington University's Elliot School of International Affairs, Jean-David Levitte explained that the French are at odds to understand this "war on terror" and that they prefer "to wage war on the terrorists". There again, the nuance is important, and the choice of words never innocent. The Americans have dropped Ahmad Chalabi, formerly the Iraqi star of the neo-conservatives. This banker, who is being prosecuted in Jordan, had contributed to harsh anti-French campaigns, namely with his Washington network of friends, among whom a bunch of "scribblers" who make money by writing books extolling "France's treason". Obliging networks such as Fox News, though they remain relatively confidential in the United States, invite them regularly and introduce them as "investigation journalists". Too much is too much, this following the gutter anti-French, German, Belgian, and Canadian websites that have flourished ("Fuck the French.com" is one of them that has finally shut down) – beyond a degree of obsession, there is decidedly a persistent American subculture – following André Flahaut, the Belgian Defense Minister, Jean-David Levitte, the French ambassador to the United States, decided in turn to react and recall some first truths by exclaiming: "Give France a break", in a definitely non-diplomatic language. The caption "Today Baghdad, Tomorrow Paris" chalked on the turret of an American tank during the invasion of Iraq was already foreboding hard times…

On the British side, the Prime Minister found the right words when he apologized "to anyone who has been mistreated by any of our soldiers.". During an exclusive interview with France 3 reporter Christian Malar, Tony Blair said with conviction: "We went to Iraq to end those types of abuses, not to engage in them." Aired worldwide, this interview, which took place a few days before the discovery of appalling fake photographs aiming at discrediting British troops and the arrests of four culprits, somewhat eased the tension. However, the British participation in Iraq and particularly Bush's unconditional support of Sharon are not, by and large, unanimously approved in Britain. Thus, on 26 April 2004, 52 retired Foreign Office diplomats berated Tony Blair for his support of the United States' Middle East policies which are "doomed to failure" and demanded their "fundamental reassessment". This warning follows the protest of about sixty high level American diplomats who are also concerned by the ongoing shift and criticize an ostensibly pro-Israeli policy that is not only discrediting the United States in the Arab and Muslim world, but also harming Israeli interests. Whether about Iraq or the Near East, Tony Blair is not gaining any benefit from his seamless support of George Bush. However, the British government is at least intending to quickly find, if possible, an honorable outcome to the Iraqi crisis. Sir Jeremy Greenstock, the senior British Representative in Iraq, stopped in Paris and confessed to Christian Malar that he did not entertain any illusion on the chances of the goals set for the end of June by Washington being achieved at that date. According to him, more time will be required to stabilize Iraq.

Nature abhors a vacuum: The American President is experiencing setbacks in his election campaigning. An easy re-election does not seem "a cinch" anymore. As Christian Malar puts it, George W. Bush does not seem to have any precise plan to end the crisis and stabilize Iraq. His Democrat challenger does not fare better. The situation in Iraq is militarily difficult and politically a disaster for Washington, this following the revelations that tainted the honor of the US Army because of the behavior of a few of its troops. This mixing of trades, the use of untrained reservists, the use of mercenaries or of more or less special forces does not suit the professional servicemen who were the first to alert their chain of command, the top of which turned a deaf ear. The credibility of the President and of his Defense Minister is now in doubt. It is difficult to imagine that the next NATO summit in Istanbul will decide the creation of a force commanded by an American general… In the Arab world, a feeling of abandonment has replaced that of disbelief.

How to avoid chaos in the Near East? On 19 April, stopping over in Paris, President Hosni Mubarak again blew the whistle following the meeting of Ariel Sharon with George W. Bush. The King of Jordan, who was visiting the United States, postponed his visit to the White House. Saddam Hussein's capture will not have contributed to settling the Israeli-Arab conflict. "There are plenty of good ideas, but they are never implemented… What's missing are guarantee mechanisms". Nassif Hitti, the Ambassador of the League of Arab States in Paris, invited by the Franco-American Press Club, notes two paradoxes: on one side "too much inaction", on the other "too many hasty actions". To this highly cultured man who does not mince matters, one thing is sure: time runs counter to peace. However, the degrading situation could lead to the emergence of a third way for the South countries, the Way of the Little Dragon, as described in Richard Labévière's editorial on RFI radio network.

Terrorism: Among all the recent testimonies heard by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks on the United States, dubbed the 9/11 commission, some of which are enlightening, one stands out: that of Ambassador J. Cofer Black, the former Director of the CIA's Counterterrorist Center, who admits that whatever the resources allocated to the intelligence services, policy makers  also share responsibility, and who poses the question: "the Only Way to Address Terrorism Is to Deal with the Issues that Create Terrorism". This is akin to Jacques Chirac's address to the United Nations: Terrorism takes as its pretext the frustrations born of unresolved conflicts.

The Entente Cordiale centenary: Queen Elisabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh came to France to celebrate the centenary of Entente Cordiale. France is aware of its debt to the United Kingdom. Beyond the official discourse, and even beyond differences, obviously what unites France and the United Kingdom is much more than what divides them. Entente Cordiale, in other words when wisdom prevailed over passion, is an accord that was to lay the basis for a decisive alliance. Following a century of a sometimes bumpy relationship, as Foreign Office Secretary Jack Straw admits not without humor, our most passionate rivalry is confined to the sports field.

Algeria: The Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika was very comfortably re-elected for a second five-year mandate. Following some difficult years, Algeria is now on the path of economic recovery, after having established civil peace. During an exclusive interview one week before the first ballot, President Bouteflika had a long talk with Christian Malar and told him what his three priorities would be if he was re-elected. President Chirac made it a point to visit Algiers the day after this re-election to celebrate an outstanding partnership with Algiers, and clearly reaffirm the option for a together strong, ambitious and appeased relationship between France and Algeria.

Europe: And what about Europe? On May 1^st it was extended as planned. It must now get organized without forgetting its security and defense. In this domain, Noëlle Lenoir perfectly recalled the role of France and Germany in Washington. Britain is in turn conscious of the need to bolster Europe's capability in terms of defense. This made General Henri Bentégeat, the French Chief of Joint Staff, more optimistic when he addressed the trilateral training seminar on European defense and security organized by IHEDN (Institute for Higher Studies on National Defense) on 22 April 2004: Europe is a matter of soul. Within the new environment, he finds "three prevailing factors, three areas of concern, and three reasons for hope". On her part, the French Defense Minister, Michèle Alliot-Marie, recalled the three ambitions Europe should have to preserve its defense: to be in a position to defend its citizens, its interests and its values, wherever necessary, to have an autonomous appreciation and action capability, and not to be dependent in the strategic and technological areas. Then, why not reflect on the future of Spatial Europe and transatlantic cooperation as Didier Compard has?

However, as far as Europe's economic defense is concerned, the facts are different. François Mitterrand used to say that "Europe is at war with America but does not know it". Therefore, Europe must recover its taste for conquest, as suggested by Bernard Carayon, the author of a report on economic intelligence, and thus prove Valery wrong, Valery who said that, as far back as 1931, "Europe only yearned to be governed by an American commission". "Europe's industrial history is also made of renunciations and political innocence"… "Courses in economic intelligence! This is where the worst meets the best… Some clear minds, albeit isolated, long unheard, and then a lot of quacks using an Anglo-Saxon gibberish, who present competitive intelligence tools as if they were a revolutionary method! In France, end and means have long been confused". Let us hope that in this domain the appointment of Alain Juillet will be an occasion for the State to become aware of its responsibility as well as a European incentive. We have seen how some American investment funds were weakening European Defense: the stakes are enormous. As Sorbas von Coester very rightly recalls, it might be high time for Europe to redefine its priorities in terms of space technology, network-centric warfare, and Internet. Before it is too late!