The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: Jacques Chirac

  • Sir John Major’s Statement on the Death of President Jacques Chirac – 26 September 2019

    The statement issued on Thursday 26 September 2019 by Sir John Major, following the death of former French President Jacques Chirac.

    President Jacques Chirac of France was always prepared to be a friend and partner of the United Kingdom.

    He sat in the Centre Right of politics, and was unattracted by extremes.

    An engaging man, and a supreme politician – but one whose mind could be changed by facts, by persuasion, or by circumstance. Although he was forever impulsive – and often brave – once he gave his word it was, in my own experience, invariably honoured.

    London

    26 September 2019

  • John Major’s Joint Press Conference with President Chirac – 8 November 1996

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s joint press conference with President Chirac of France, given in Bordeaux on Friday 8th November 1996.

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    Good Afternoon. First of all let me welcome the British delegation, Ministers and their officials with them. On behalf of the Mayor of Bordeaux and on my own account I would like to wish them the warmest welcome.

    This morning we have had meetings, as you will be aware. Can I also take this opportunity to welcome the British and French journalists who are here for this press conference.

    So we had meetings this morning and then we had the plenary meeting, which is the usual custom in these summits. And very briefly I will go over what has been said and done at this 19th Anglo-French Summit.

    Of course we talked about monetary union yesterday evening at dinner. Nothing has moved on that. I informed the Prime Minister about the French position, which you are all aware of.

    The British Prime Minister of course repeated to me the British position, which you are aware of.

    On the Intergovernmental Conference, which we discussed this morning, it seems that there are many areas of common ground, although there are still areas where there are differences of opinion. Those areas where we have common ground are our determination to make a significant forward progress at Dublin and to conclude our Intergovernmental Conference in Amsterdam next June. There is also agreement in principle on a range of issues: the role of national parliaments; the principle of subsidiarity and the implementation thereof; weighting of voting; the size of the Commission; the European Parliament; the Court of Justice. Those are the main headings that we addressed and where we have common ground. Those areas where we differ, there are some still. We have worked on them already and we are trying to clarify our respective positions to see how far we can harmonise our positions on the question of qualified majority voting, defence and matters relating to the third pillar.

    Then there is a particular subject where there is some ambiguity where we need to reflect further in the coming weeks, and this is everything referring to enhanced cooperation and the implementation of that cooperation. On the question of enlargement we are largely in agreement: equal treatment from the outset for all countries and I have proposed the convening of a European Conference as a substitute for the meetings that we now have with the 11 candidate nations for entry into the Union and I feel that the present arrangement for the meetings with the representatives of those nations is not correct and we should have a European Conference where more serenely and more calmly we should discuss together with our future partners the way in which things are evolving. But there is no question of this conference being in any way a substitute for the procedure relating to accession to the Union. It is a dialogue.

    We have noted that we have common ground in our reaction to the unilateral trade measures taken by the US Government, the Helms-Burton-D’Amato legislation, and the need for the Community to respond as one.

    We have also noted that we have an identical viewpoint on the need to strengthen our efforts to combat drugs and as quickly as possible to try and ensure that all European legislation is harmonised and it is as firm on this problem.

    We have also discussed BSE and on this we noted that information that was in the headlines of the press some days back, that the British were not complying with the conditions they accepted in Florence was wrong, and we took the occasion to rectify that misinformation. And the Prime Minister reconfirmed to me that the United Kingdom fully shares the concerns of France regarding bananas.

    Then we turned to political and strategic issues and I would say that the areas of common ground between France and the United Kingdom, and of course including Germany, have allowed us to reach agreement on the reform of NATO. We discussed the situation and outstanding problems regarding the general reform of NATO, which France could support. We talked about the enlargement of NATO which we are favourable to on condition that that enlargement takes place in conditions that are from the outside acceptable to Russia, although of course there is no question of giving Russia a veto on this. But we also said we need a European security architecture that covers the whole of Europe and which will enable us to turn the page and go forward from Yalta. We also noted that our approach to the forthcoming OSCE Summit in Lisbon was identical.

    Then we turned to international issues and there again we have identical views on many areas, like the former Yugoslavia, the forthcoming conferences on Bosnia, the former Yugoslavia, in Paris and in London, on post-IFOR. We also expressed our concern regarding the process of peace in the Middle East, again an area of common ground, our concern. And then we have an identical approach of our countries in our relations with Russia. And in conclusion, something that we began with, we have a common position on the drama that Zaire is currently subject to with refugees being chased out of their refugee camps in the Kivo province. You are aware that we published a joint communique on this this morning and indeed it was on that point that we began our discussion.

    Then finally on bilateral issues, we noted that military cooperation between our two countries was increasingly more wide-ranging and was taking place in very efficient and friendly terms, and our respective Defence Ministers have just signed a Naval Cooperation Agreement. The Joint Franco-British Air Group is going to be expanded to include Germany and Italy. On armaments we also noted that important and significant progress had been made in areas of cooperation. The United Kingdom is going to join the European Armaments Agency, where France and Germany are already members, and we have several important agreements, the agreement between British Aerospace and Masa in particular.

    As regards the Eurotunnel, we noted that there is a problem there and that together we need to study this and find the best possible solution, taking account of the constraints on both sides, both in the United Kingdom and in France.

    And we noted the fact that initiatives, particularly on drugs and school exchanges, that we decided when I went on a State Visit to Britain last year, we noted that these initiatives were well under way and we were very happy to note that that was the case.

    Just two further points that are quite important we noted that we have excellent cooperation in the implementation of the conclusions of the G7 regarding multilateral debt; we also noted that we had agreement on security of the international financial system, looking forward to Denver. So we have an identical approach and focus on these matters.

    And finally, in the same spirit, we noted that there has been intensification of cooperation on security and anti-terrorism measures with enhanced cooperation between our respective services. The cooperation is already good but we look forward to it being continued effectively. I think that is what we have done today. Just one further step forward in the cooperation between France and Great Britain which is characterised by friendship and trust. Thank you.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let me just add a few words to what the President has said. If I may at the outset, I would like to thank the President and the Prime Minister for their hospitality yesterday and today in Bordeaux and also the people of Bordeaux. It is always a disruption to normal life when one of these summits takes place, but we have had an enormously warm reception here and for that I would like to express my very deep thanks.

    I think we have had an excellent summit today. It is built on a very good relationship and a very wide range of mutual interests, both bilaterally and internationally.

    The President has summarised with great detail many of the matters we discussed and I will just perhaps emphasise a few of the points very briefly. We spent some time last evening and this morning discussing Zaire, as indeed did our Foreign Ministers. It is a complex issue. I don’t think anyone doubts the humanitarian difficulties that are building up there, or the need for help and assistance in the region. We intend to work constructively with our French colleagues, with the rest of the international community, and try and play our role in getting clear decisions taken most appropriately I think at the United Nations, as to what international action is most appropriate. The United Kingdom already makes strong humanitarian commitments to African countries, including Zaire, and I have no doubt we will have a role of some sort in whatever decisions are taken and clearly it is important that decisions about Zaire are clear-cut and taken speedily and we both agreed that that should be the case.

    We spent quite a lot of time this morning discussing European Union issues. It is very fashionable, of course, to concentrate on the areas of difference amongst European partners. We discussed those, of course, we also noted the areas of agreement: on national sovereignty; on the role of national parliaments; on subsidiarity; on the desirability, the necessity even, of re-weighting the votes in the European Union; on the need for a reduction in the size of the Commission; on common foreign and security policy where there is very wide agreement, not total agreement but very wide agreements on enlargement; on the powers of the European Parliament; and on our joint wish to look again at the powers of the European Court of Justice, particularly in the areas where they make retrospective judgments that change European law and lead to large domestic expenditure within individual nation states. Many of these matters are matters where we are coordinating and we will endeavour as far as we can to see whether we can form a common position on many of these issues between now and the Dublin Summit and certainly between now and the conclusion of the Intergovernmental Conference.

    Over the last two or three years there has been a very dramatic extension of our defence cooperation and today, in addition to discussion between our Defence Ministers of course there has been discussion between a wide range of senior Ministers covering their own individual subjects, and I am grateful to all of them for their role in this summit.

    As far as defence is concerned, we had an Air Agreement that the President and I signed some time ago. Our Defence Ministers signed a Letter of Intent on Naval Cooperation this morning and that builds on the strong military cooperation, including nuclear cooperation, that we already have. And our Defence Ministers will be further examining the scope for yet more practical detailed cooperation as far as our Armies are concerned to match that that exists with the Air Force and with the Navy.

    We also do a considerable amount of work together on drugs and I saw yesterday the work of French anti-drugs forces in Bordeaux. Here is an area, as the French said, where we believe it is appropriate to continue to press across Europe for a mere effective way of working together and for some coordination, some toughening of the penalties for drug offences across the European Union. We have very tough penalties already in the United Kingdom, we would be very pleased to see them reflected right the way across the nation states of Europe.

    We spent a little while also on terrorism, that is a problem that both of us have had to face from time to time. Indeed the room where we met this morning was afflicted with a bomb attack just a few months ago.

    On international issues of course we discussed the aftermath of the US elections, the Middle East peace process, Bosnia, Iraq and a range of other areas.

    We both noted with considerable pleasure the tremendous progress that has been made by the collaborative venture, Airbus. Many were sceptical about that when it started, but think it has probably proved itself the most effective piece of European collaborative industrial ventures that we have yet seen. It has taken a very large percentage of the international aircraft market and it has ambitions to become the largest aircraft supplier in the world. So that is going extremely well and we were delighted at the orders that Airbus got yesterday from the United States.

    We discussed also, as the President said, areas where we are not quite in agreement. It is inevitable that there are some of those. We have a relationship where we can discuss the areas of agreement, and the areas of disagreement, with complete frankness. We do have some different perceptions on some European matters and we were able to discuss those to see where we can narrow the differences and to ensure that there are no misunderstandings between us.

    We also looked at a range of bilateral initiatives, most of which are going extremely well, the exchange of students and a range of other matters perhaps I need not detain you with.

    So I found it an extremely worthwhile exchange of views. I think it is the 7th time the President and I have had the opportunity of exchanging views like this and I think that cumulative series of meetings is showing a good deal, of results in terms of the growing and deepening relationship between the United Kingdom and France.

    So I am very grateful for the meeting we have had here today and I think the President and I will be happy to try and field any questions that you may have.

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    QUESTION (Robin Oakley, BBC):

    President Chirac, you mentioned discussions on the IGC and Mr Major has said that if the European Court finds against Britain on the 48 hours working directive he will be seeking treaty amendments. Would he have your support in seeking such treaty amendments following a European Court of Justice decision? And on the communique on Zaire, could I ask why there is no reference to military action given that France was suggesting, in advance of today, that countries not prepared to commit themselves to military action were spineless?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    On the dispute between the United Kingdom and the Court, I am very close to John Major’s position on this and quite prepared to support him. Turning to Zaire, France had never proposed a military engagement in Zaire. What we had said was if there were to be an international force, requested by the African states and controlled by the UN and the OAU, then France would be prepared to join and make a contribution to such a force to enable the refugees to go back to their camps and to enable humanitarian aid to get through, because humanitarian aid is already there on the ground but unfortunately cannot be got to the refugees

    Yesterday there was a meeting of the 15, there was a meeting of the Security Council, there is a whole series of contacts that are going between the countries, members of the Union and the United States, despite the fact that this has happened on the day of the elections in the United States. And France wants and hopes that, provided the Africans ask for intervention in the conditions that I have said, we would be prepared to respond.

    QUESTION:

    President, can you really talk about a common resolution on Zaire when France has got a draft resolution before the United Nations and as the Prime Minister seems to be more than reticent, don’t you think that we are losing a lot of time and time is of the essence in this?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    You have seen the Franco-British communique. There is no divergence of views between us on this. We all want to try and get a solution on humanitarian grounds as quickly as possible but that doesn’t mean that we can just go ahead and do just anything.

    Yesterday evening at about 8 p m., I had a call from President Mandela who was trying to get in touch with President Mobuto. Mobuto had said that he would be favourable to have a force coming to Zaire. You have to take into account that all this would be coming into Zaire so Mobuto said he would accept a neutral force on Zairean territory.

    All this means that we have to reflect and there has to be a certain amount of agreement among the Africans. It is not our role to go ahead with any initiative against their wishes, this is their affair.

    Of course, we denounce what is happening on humanitarian grounds and we the Europeans – the Union – will do everything we can to improve the humanitarian situation but there is the reality that it is not happening here in our countries so we must have agreement with the Africans as to what we are going to do because otherwise we can’t do anything.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let me just add a point to that question because there is no difference between France and Britain about the importance of seeking international help into Zaire, both France and Britain are already providing it. We have a very long – a very proud record I think, both countries – of helping in humanitarian situations.

    The question is to decide what precisely needs to be done and how it can be done and that does require some further international discussion. For example, you mentioned particularly the question of troops. We need to know what the host governments would think about that, what would the adjacent governments think about that, would there be a preference for African troops, would they want European involvement, would they want European logistic support, would they just want European financial support, how is that going to be dealt with via the United Nations, what would be the view of the Organisation for African Unity?

    There is no dispute between the President and I whatsoever about the urgency and imperative nature of trying to get some extra help there. No-one who sees those pictures coming out of the Great Lakes district can be in any doubt about that and nobody who knows the history of France or the history of the United Kingdom in assisting in humanitarian problems of this sort can doubt our willingness to assist but what we have to do is to make sure that we coordinate with other people to provide assistance that is appropriate. If it is appropriate at some stage to go ahead with troops, what is to be their mission? That needs to be discussed and determined, the command structure.

    What I am not doing is arguing for a long delay, what I am saying is that we need to get the answers to those questions right before we can take decisions. France has raised the urgency of those questions, it is now being discussed in the United Nations, France has some plans, Mrs. Ogata has some plans, other people have plans. The urgent thing now – and France has tabled its own resolution – is to make sure that this is discussed and that decisions are taken speedily and upon that fundamental point there is total agreement between the President and I, between France and the United Kingdom.

    QUESTION (Financial Times):

    President Chirac, in the wider area of social policy, are you convinced by the lower rate of unemployment in Britain, that France needs to introduce more flexibility into its labour market to get it higher rate of unemployment down?

    Secondly, you mentioned Eurotunnel. Are you still in favour of prolonging the concession of the Eurotunnel operators in order to ease their financial problems?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    On the first point, yes, I note the positive trends of the results achieved by the British Government on unemployment, of course I note that. I am not entirely certain that these results are due to more or less flexibility. I think they are more the result of the rigorous management over several years of the economy in the United Kingdom, in particular of overcoming the deficit and sound financial management.

    I am convinced that you cannot fight unemployment and bring it down unless you have sound management because that is the only way for real growth. That in itself is not enough of course to bring unemployment down but what it can do is give you the necessary margin of manoeuvre in financial terms to enable measures to bring unemployment down to be more effective.

    As regards flexibility which you have raised, in France we are very committed to a social model that we have. The social benefits that we have and enjoy should not be challenged in our view. I can agree, of course, that we should constantly adapt to new situations but that should not be done by raising any questions about social security and the security of workers on what they have achieved and the benefits they have won in the past.

    What I would say is that we want a European model and we are working for that, we want to have that approach to this issue. Of course, we have a lot to learn from the British on management and the rigorous way in which they have managed the economy which has enabled them to relaunch their economy on firmer ground.

    On Eurotunnel, yes, there is this request for an extension of the concession. Of course, we are aware that that creates problems for the British authorities and so we are not demanding. What we are looking for is a solution and we hope we have one solution or the other. What we want to do is find a solution and look at ways of doing that and I know that the British authorities together with their French colleagues and counterparts are looking seriously to try and find the best possible solution to these difficulties.

    QUESTION:

    President, a question on domestic policy. It has been said you are going to change your Prime Minister. Is that true?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    I am not sure that this is a very elegant question to raise in the presence of the British Prime Minister. He is going to ask himself where he has ended up, where he is and you should keep to the subjects of our press conference but I have been told that lots of French journalists have asked this question.

    I am extremely attentive and I am sure nobody would challenge what the French people say. I listen to the French people. I also listen all the time to proposals and suggestions that come from their representatives, politicians, businessmen from all areas and I listen very carefully to them but on the other hand, I am not going to go into this kind of declaration.

    What we need to do is together face up to the serious problems that France has to face in the interests of our people and this should be our foremost concern. Like you, I am aware of the difficulties that our people have, our country is engaged on a difficult exercise, a difficult effort, a thankless task but one that cannot be avoided, to rebuild our economy. We need to restore social cohesion and we are engaged on that and that is the only way to ensure the future security of the French people and of future generations so I will say to you that I have full confidence in the courage and the clearness of vision and the character of the Prime Minister but also of the governing party, and indeed of all the French people to successfully conclude this difficult effort we are engaged upon. Solidarity today, particularly in the majority of people in the government party that supports the government is a moral obligation at this moment in time.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, can I bring you back to the question of the 48-hour working week and ask you to react to what Mr Chirac said and say what sort of hope you have of actually getting this decision reversed if it does go against you on Tuesday?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    At the moment, on the 48-hour week we have the Advocate-General’s opinion which was adverse. We don’t yet have the European Court’s decision which we will get I imagine next week. I hope it will be favourable but if it follows the Advocate-General’s opinion and is unfavourable, then clearly we will seek to reverse it.

    We will seek to reverse it for several reasons. Firstly, we believe it has been brought forward under the wrong treaty head. It has been brought forward under the health and safety element of the treaty so that it can be put through by qualified majority vote. We don’t think that is the appropriate place for decisions that effectively relate to working conditions. We believe firstly that it is in the wrong place in the treaty and once the Social Contract had been agreed it was more relevantly placed there – though it wasn’t put there – and secondly, these are matters predominantly for employer and employees; thirdly, we don’t believe they are in an event a matter for prescriptive judgment from Brussels upon individual nation states so for those reasons we believe it needs to be reversed.

    It is not just what is specifically in the working time directive, it is the principle of the working time directive and the fact that if we were to accept that after a European Court judgment, then we fear that the same treaty head would be used to drive through other pieces of legislation that also ought to come under the Social Contract for which the United Kingdom has an opt-out so if we lose then we will need to seek a change to the treaty and I have made it clear – not recently, I made it clear many months ago – that in those circumstances we would return to our colleagues and we would say we do not think this is appropriate, we do not think that this is in the spirit of what should have been done following the agreement that the United Kingdom had an opt-out on the Social Contract and we will say to our European colleagues that we wish to see this matter dealt with and changed in the intergovernmental conference and that will be a very important matter for us; we will bring it forward and we will expect our European colleagues to respond. They know about my concern for it, I have mentioned it in European Councils before. What I am saying to you today is not in any sense a surprise to the Commission or to any of the heads of government across Europe, they have known for some time how strongly we have felt about this issue and it is a matter of prime importance to us and we will seek the treaty change I referred to

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, you have said in your article in “Le Monde” that you were a convinced European Everybody knows that if you are a convinced European in your country, in your party you have Euro-sceptics who often give you a hard time of it. Over time, do you think you are going to be able to persuade them to become good Europeans or are things going to remain uncertain over a further period?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I have to say the definition of a good European is quite an interesting one and I am not sure that many people would agree precisely what the definition of a good European is. I am a convinced European, I have no doubt whatever that Britain’s role is within Europe but that does not mean that I agree with every aspect of the way in which Europe is developing, indeed I do not and my judgement is that the good European does not gently slide behind his colleagues and say “Well, I don’t like this but I am going to follow the herd!” the good European, if he thinks something is going wrong, sounds the alarm and says so and that is the way in which I see the role of the United Kingdom.

    In areas where we disagree with our colleagues – and there are some – we shall say so, not because the British Government is adopting an anti-European position but because in certain areas the British Government believes the direction in which Europe is going is the wrong direction and if it is the wrong direction I think we have a duty, a responsibility, to say so and to argue our case with our European partners and that is what we will do.

    You referred to people who take a different view, less-convinced Europeans in my party. Well, they exist in every country. If you look at some of the opinion polls across Europe on some great issues at the moment, you will find very sharp divisions among the public in a number of European countries. I don’t think this is necessarily a bad thing, I think it is very important that there is a proper, constructive European debate about the great issues that are immediately in front of us.

    I will try and persuade people both in the United Kingdom and elsewhere across Europe of the substantive nature of our concern firstly to build a Europe that works and secondly to avoid making errors in the construction of Europe that I believe would damage it in the short-term and in the long-term so those are the matters that I debate with my European partners. I don’t do it in a spirit of obstructionism, I don’t do it in a spirit of anti-Europeanism, I debate areas of difference with them where I believe that there is a better way of proceeding for the future and I will continue to do that. Whether I will prevail or not with my European colleagues or indeed with colleagues at home remains to be seen.

    QUESTION (John Kampfner, Financial Times)

    Prime Minister, on EMU what is your reaction to the report of the Commission this week suggesting that twelve countries would qualify for the convergence criteria with the exclusion of Britain? Do you see this as a reasonably fair prediction of what may happen?

    To the President, how do you respond to criticism of the means by which France may well bring itself within the 3 per cent criterion by the use of the transference of France Telecom’s debt? Do you regard that criticism as valid in any respect and how do you also react to the Commission’s report?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    If I may answer first since the first question was directed to me, with great frankness, I don’t recognise your description of the Commission’s report. The Commission set out a range of criteria on the fiscal deficit – we are at present outside the range though we are closing to within the range. There is a range of other particular criteria where some countries are wildly outside the criteria. There are some countries on the debt criteria that are nearly 100 per cent above the criteria with no credible likelihood that they are going to get down to within it for a very long time and if they were to go into a single currency it could only be on the basis of an interpretation that they were moving in the right direction rather than that they had actually got within the strict interpretation of the Maastricht criteria.

    In most of the areas, Britain is in the convergence criteria, where we are hot we are in any event – quite apart from the necessity to get in it for that reason – moving down within those convergence criteria because they are sensible economic policies to follow and the Chancellor of the Exchequer is rigorously following them so I believe Britain is moving very rapidly towards the criteria where it would have the option of joining or not joining according to the way it decided at the time.

    I personally would be surprised if by 1st January 1999 anything remotely like twelve nations were to qualify for EMU upon a strict interpretation of the criteria. If the criteria are interpreted liberally, then of course more countries will qualify; if they are interpreted strictly, then I would be very surprised if when we get there there are anything like that number who are able to qualify.

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    On the question that you addressed to me I would like to say that when we prepared our budget we of course consulted French experts, the best in the field, and they said to us that regarding the Telecom debt we could rightly act in the way we did. Of course that is not enough so we submitted the matter for consideration by international experts and then by European Union experts; they all looked at our proposal in great detail and they all confirmed that it was perfectly justifiable and that our budget provisions were completely honest and transparent. I can’t go further than that and I am sure you would not want to put yourself in the place of the most competent European experts.

    Thank you.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Press Conference with President Jacques Chirac – 15 May 1996

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s joint press conference with President Jacques Chirac, held in London on Wednesday 15th May 1996.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Can I say how very pleased we are to welcome the President here to Downing Street this morning. We have had the opportunity this morning of extremely productive discussions. I propose firstly to ask the President to report on those, I will then add a few words to that and thereafter we will take some questions.

    I should mention to you, I think most of you will know this, but the President has to address a joint session of Parliament very shortly so I fear we only have a limited time this morning. So without any further delay I will invite the President to speak to you.

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    First of all I would like to thank the Prime Minister, to thank Her Majesty The Queen too and to say how very much I appreciated the way I have been welcomed for this visit.

    This morning we had a long conversation with the Prime Minister and the Foreign Ministers and our officials, and everyone will I think probably understand that the first subject that was discussed, because it is an urgent topical matter with many consequences, was the subject of BSE and the beef problem. And we have tried to make a very considerable effort in order to show real solidarity because there must be solidarity in a crisis of this kind in Europe and we want solidarity really to mean something, not just to be a vain word, and I hope this will come out clearly very soon, and perhaps even today in practical terms.

    We also discussed together an overall range of European affairs, including the preparation of the IGC and the problems linked to the present evolution of Europe, developments, enlargement, the single currency etc. We discussed questions of military cooperation, bilateral military cooperation, which is an area in which there is very considerable convergence in matters of concern to each country and the proposals that have been made by England and France. We also of course discussed a certain number of difficult situations in the modern world, and in particular Bosnia, but also Burundi and a certain number of other problems.

    And lastly we discussed certain bilateral issues, and in particular we took certain joint decisions relating to cultural affairs, or education affairs in particular for the exchange of young students for secondary school exchanges. This is the kind of thing we want to expand considerable. Also, a common policy on books publishing and translation.

    So those are the matters that we have been talking about today and I would like to particularly mention the spirit of our meeting, which can be summed up in a word, this is a real dialogue, consultation for concerted action which between England and France, this is the kind of thing which must imperatively be strengthened still further. That is my ambition and I understand it also to be the ambition of the British Prime Minister.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Jacques, thank you very much. Let me just add a few words to that. Firstly, perhaps I can endorse what the President has had to say. The relationship between Britain and France is extremely close at the moment. In a large number of areas we have very positive and very detailed cooperation, in defence in particular, but in many other areas as well, and the President has mentioned the number of bilateral initiatives that we have finally agreed this morning, the exchange of students perhaps being a particularly relevant one for the relationship between Britain and France, but by no means the only one.

    Of course there are areas of difference, and we have discussed those as well. We have discussed in particular this morning ways in which we might cooperate and look at one another’s positions in the intergovernmental conference before it begins.

    There are a wide range of areas where we have communal interests, and we have agreed that we will examine those and see wherever possible whether we can reach a joint position for the intergovernmental conference.

    I am very grateful for what the President has had to say in his support for the Commission’s proposal to lift the ban on gelatine, tallow and semen today. I think it is extremely important that we get the gelatine, tallow and semen ban lifted. I hope that will happen today. I am grateful for the very positive role that the President in particular has played in seeking to ensure that this comes about.

    We have touched on a wide range of international issues as well: the expansion of NATO, a matter of some importance to both of us; we looked at the relationships and the changes that are happening in different parts of the world. But the predominant part of the discussion was based upon European matters and bilateral matters, as the President has set out just a few moments ago.

     

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    QUESTION (Mike Brunson, ITN):

    Prime Minister and Mr President, if this partial ban is not eased today, how serious a problem is it going to be?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We must hope firstly that it is eased today. We see no scientific reason for it not to be eased today, and if it were not to be eased today I think we would need to examine precisely why not and how that matter would proceed. But before I say more about that I think we had better wait and see what happens today.

    QUESTION (Adam Boulton, Sky News):

    Mr President, if British beef is good enough for you to eat, why isn’t it good enough to be traded freely within the European Community?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    This is a [indistinct] issue and it is in fact irrational. There is a fear, a fear of disease, a fear of illness, and it is very difficult to overcome that. And I think the British government has done everything it can, it has put all its resources to bear to convince the Commission and the European Union of the need to have a plan, a plan which will in the long term and without risk restore faith in beef consumption. And I would think that the British government is making every effort and I hope we will make progress. We must go ahead step by step. Today as we understand, the Commission is going to propose that the embargo be removed. France favours that position. This will apply to gelatine, tallow and semen, of course, subject to compliance with the technical conditions which the Commission has included in its proposal.

    But it seems to me that these conditions are already in place and are being fulfilled by the British government, so there is no reason therefore for us not to support the proposal by the Commission. That would be a first step, a step in the right direction I would say. And in conclusion I would say that we think that this is a problem that affects the whole of Europe and it is up to Europe to express solidarity when solidarity is needed and I do hope that that strong solidarity will be expressed as of today.

    QUESTION:

    President Chirac, the British say that we supported you on nuclear matters, and in fact John Major was the only one to support you at that time, and now we look to you to support him on beef – is that a legitimate claim by him?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    I don’t think it is a problem of supporting one another, it is a question of solidarity on a position. I have told you what France’s position is today, our position it seems to me is a reasonable one and it gives expression to the kind of solidarity that Europe must have with the United Kingdom in its present crisis that it is undergoing.

    QUESTION:

    [Indistinct] have made some countries in the region to express the strong desire and wish that the United Kingdom, and mainly France as well, and Europe to play a major role in order to secure the peace that has been achieved so far. This matter has not been raised in your talks but will it be considered here in the future by the European Union as a whole?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I should say that the President and I were in touch on a number of occasions, as were Mr Rifkind and Mr de Charette, on the subject of the Middle East and the particular problems in Lebanon recently. There was a very close relationship and if I may say so, the Foreign Minister played a very distinguished role at that time in trying to bring about the ceasefire that has subsequently occurred. Huge progress has been made in the Middle East, there is more to be done, there is no doubt about that. There is no doubt I think that the present position in Lebanon is a fragile position across the border and we are looking for further progress. There is a great deal of bilateral cooperation, particularly between our Foreign Ministers but also directly between the President and dealing with this particular problem. There are some areas where the European Union can play a role, but I think predominantly the role will be played by the members of the Permanent Five, by Britain, by France and by the United States operating bilaterally.

    But that it is a very important matter is beyond doubt and that the British and the French governments are engaged is also beyond doubt.

    QUESTION:

    [Indistinct] in the case of the embargo not being lifted tonight, would you contemplate to have the authority of the empty chair?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am not going to indicate now what is going to happen in the hypothetical situation that you set out. If there is a bad decision today then we will make our position clear over the next day or so. But at the moment I very much hope that a sensible decision will be reached. There is no scientific reason not to lift the ban on gelatine, tallow and on semen, no scientific reason at all, and we have made that position clear. The position is really quite straight-forward. The Commission imposed the ban, the Commission have been discussing the matter with the British government. The Commission have now decided to propose that the ban is lifted. Upon that basis I see no proper justification for our colleagues in Europe not agreeing with that, now we must wait and see what happens later today.

    QUESTION (Nicholas Witchell, BBC):

    Mr President, have you heard anything from Prime Minister Major today to make you wholeheartedly confident that Britain will be, as you said at Buckingham Palace last night, a cornerstone in the construction of Europe?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    Our discussions on European matters are on-going between our two countries and the British Prime Minister is committed to participating actively in the future of Europe. I understand completely the positions on both sides, and the problems that we have, but we always settle our problems in an open and friendly manner. And for my part what I would like to see is these friendly discussions going forward so that we can hear the voice of the United Kingdom strongly in the European system. You cannot have the future of Europe built without a strong British presence and without Britain being heard.

    QUESTION:

    Mr President, we have heard talk about a menage a trois in Europe these days, we know the position of France, Germany and the UK, who is going to be in charge in this menage a trois?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    There is no leader, nobody takes charge in the political menage, not even in households generally. But I can say that France plays its role, as does Britain and Germany, we all do everything we can to harmonise positions. Reform is a constant endeavour, day to day effort, day in, day out, and we participate fully in those efforts.

    QUESTION:

    Today the Commission is bringing out a report on how the various countries in the EU are complying as far as debt is concerned, and therefore the implications that has for the Maastricht criteria. Do you have any comments to make on where the economy stands at the moment and being able to form a single currency, if we so decide, by 1999?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The concept of the criteria at Maastricht was originally a British concept. There are good economic criteria, quite apart from their necessity were any nation states to go ahead with a single currency in 1999. I think we will all look at the Commission report with some interest. But as to meeting those sort of criteria, they are the British government’s policy in any event to meet criteria like this for good economic reasons, and we will look at the report with interest. I think we will also look at the report as to how it indicates across Europe the economic readiness for a single currency amongst many of our partners.

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    You shouldn’t believe that the convergence criteria are the only element to be achieved to create a single currency. The convergence criteria are founded on good sense, on common sense, based on sound management of the economy. And one should note that the UK, which has proposed, and very wisely so several years back, have made the necessary proposals regarding the restructuring of its finances, is a country where unemployment has fallen. So there is a link between sound, wise, financial management and jobs. Other countries have not been as wise as the United Kingdom in past years and so they now face deficit problems and unemployment problems. Over and above any other consideration, of course we are making every effort to reduce deficits, to respect the convergence criteria, and we do this, also it is a means of more effectively combating unemployment.

    QUESTION:

    Mr President, would you say that following your conversations today, and those that you will have by the end of your visit, do you think that there will be rapprochement between the UK and French positions on the concept of the EU and the role of nation states in that union?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    I would say that my concern, ever since I took office, is to ensure that there is the greatest level of rapprochement between British and French views. And I repeat, I want the building of Europe to be effective and I do not think that that construction of Europe can be effective without agreement with Britain. So we discuss and we make progress, I repeat reform, such wide-ranging reform in particular, is an on-going effort. It also involves enhancing dialogue and makes better understanding, and that is what we do, day in and day out.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at Hampton Court – 15 May 1996

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech, with Jacques Chirac, held at Hampton Court near London on Wednesday 15th May 1996.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    May I first welcome you all here this evening, but say above all what a particular pleasure it is to welcome the President, and Madame Chirac here to Hampton Court on this occasion.

    We had this morning around two hours of talks, a press conference in Number 10, a fairly busy day for the President and it seemed a good opportunity to offer him a friendly change of scenery this evening.

    Hampton Court has been, for most of its life, a royal palace. Cardinal Wolsey had a great deal to do with its foundation. He had, Mr President, the dubious distinction of leading one of Henry VIII’s first armies rather unsuccessfully I recall against France. And he began to build this in 1514. 12 years later, in a rather vain attempt to curry favour with Henry VIII, he gave it to the King, and without any vain intent to curry favour with Wolsey, the King accepted it.

    It has had a very remarkable history. The game of real tennis was born here in Hampton Court, so was Edward VI. Queen Mary spent her honeymoon here, and so did Charles II. James I organised the conference here which led to the authorised version of the bible. And Charles I assembled many of the magnificent pictures that you see around you this evening and for his pains was imprisoned here after the Civil War. King William died after falling off his horse here. And Queen Anne enjoyed the hunting so much here that even when illness prevented her riding any more she had the parks drained and the parks levelled so that she could hunt by carriage. George I had a rather different quarry, Mr President, he brought his German mistresses here, but we don’t often mention that in polite company. George II was the last sovereign to reside here before Queen Victoria opened the palace to the public.

    And yet throughout all that long history, of which the few words I have mentioned are but a small sample, the palace has had many connections with France, representing the intense interaction between our two countries over the centuries. The dates mean, very sadly, that Henry VIII left for France in 1520 to meet Francis I in the famous field of the Cloth of Gold, but not alas from here, despite the splendid portraits you see that record that famous event.

    Of course the relationship between the United Kingdom and France is not just an historical relationship. It is, I think, Mr President, a living truth. And today Britain and France stand not just as two of the oldest sovereign states in Europe, though certainly as that, not just as two countries each with a proud record of national independence, though certainly of that, but also I think as global partners – both Permanent Members of the United Nations Security Council, Europe’s only two nuclear powers, we share membership of the Group of Seven, of NATO, of the European Union, of the Western European Union and of many other bodies as well.

    We have a trade and political relationship of great depth, one with another. We are each the other’s third largest biggest direct investors and third largest export market. About 10 – 12 million Britons cross the Channel every year to France. 875 British towns are twinned with France, and nearly one-third of those have been established within the last 10 years. And there is, of course, Mr President, a very high level of exchange between our young people and you and I were delighted to announce a further enhancement of that scheme today.

    And we exchange culture as well, not just Cezanne in London for that astonishingly successful exhibition, but this year Henry Moore in Nantes, Frances Bacon at the Pompidou Centre, and a century of British sculpture in Paris. And I even noticed, perhaps at a slightly different level, that a Scottish lady will be singing for France in this year’s Eurovision Song Contest, accompanied by a Welsh singer and an Irish piper – a modern manifestation I think of the old alliance.

    A few of you may have noticed in the reception before dinner that we also exchange sportsmen. The new manager of the England football team – Glen Hoddle – who had a marvellous job, and I can’t understand why he should leave it as manager of my football team at Chelsea, but even though he neglected to win Chelsea a championship I look forward to him doing great things with the England team in the future and wish him the best of luck. He is very welcome here this evening. And he of course had a certain role in helping Monaco win the French championship. Chris Waddle of course went one better and helped Marseilles become the first French team to win the European Cup.

    And I mention this, Mr President, because I know of your own footballing interest, Paris St Germain’s most ardent supporter in many ways, and I think very pleased at their recent victory in the final of the European Cup Winner’s Cup. It is not every football fan who can receive his team at the Elysee Palace to congratulate them upon their success. I only hope they look after you extraordinarily well when you are able to watch their home matches.

    May I just touch on one other thing briefly? No evening in the United Kingdom at the moment would be entirely complete without some mention of beef. We are not serving you beef this evening. But I would like to take the opportunity of expressing my thanks to the President, and his colleagues in government, for their support over recent days and their very strong support in the progress that has been made in Brussels today. Some progress has been made today and I think there is every chance that will be carried a good deal further in the early part of next week, on Monday I hope of next week.

    We will be working hard, with the support we have had from France and from a number of other countries in the European Union, in carrying forward the progressive lifting of the ban that at present exists on British beef. I think that is merited and I look forward to that happening as speedily as possible. But for this evening I just want to take the opportunity publicly of thanking the President for his support privately, and his support publicly, so aptly demonstrated in the discussions in Brussels earlier today.

    And let me also add one other point. I would not wish to end this evening without paying a very genuine and heartfelt tribute to the President’s role in enhancing the relationship between France and the United Kingdom. I believe, as we meet here this evening, that it is as warm and as detailed, as friendly and as persuasive in all its aspects as it has been for very many years between our two countries. And a significant reason for that enhancement of our relationship is our guest this evening – the President of France – and I am most grateful to him for that.

    The toasts come later this evening. So let me simply end at the outset by welcoming you Jacques, and you Bernadette, as our guests here this evening at Hampton Court. I welcome you very warmly indeed on behalf of the British government and the British nation. And let me simply say this. I look forward to welcoming you back here and elsewhere in the United Kingdom on many occasions in the future. You are tonight amongst friends and I hope that you will enjoy the evening.

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    Prime Minister, my dear John, dear Norma. When history in fact brought our two countries together in the past it was very often on the battlefield. And here, like in France, the remnants of the past carry the imprint of past rivalry. And on the windows of this magnificent hall we can see in the middle of Henry VIII’s Coat of Arms the proud French cry of [indistinct] which was in fact the war cry of the Kings of France when they went into battle, very often against you.

    Now fortunately times have changed and there is a great feeling of solidarity which presides over the cooperation between our two countries, and it is that same feeling that is very present in my heart today when I am with you here, John, in this magnificent hall, in the middle of my State Visit to Britain.

    Her Majesty The Queen expressed this with great talent when she said that it is true that we don’t drive on the same side of the road, but it is also true that we go in the same direction.

    The very warm welcome that we have received in Great Britain, my wife and myself, I think bears witness to the very strong friendship that now bonds our two peoples together. The very gracious hospitality extended to us by Her Majesty The Queen, and our meeting with Her Majesty The Queen Mother, which I found extremely moving, and with members of the Royal Family, have in fact given us the most unforgettable moments which will remain engraved in our memories.

    During my visit to Parliament, and during the numerous talks that I have had with political leaders and with yourself in particular, Prime Minister, I was able to measure how very much our views and our interests converge, and how very much we share the same ambitions, to build a Europe that should be dynamic and prosperous, respectful of national identities, and to build together a world that should be better, with more justice, more tolerance, more humane.

    I met with the business leaders in the Guildhall and I noted the remarkable potential for innovation and development of British and French enterprises and how very successful they can be when they work together, which I very much encourage them to do.

    These conversations, and the contacts I have had, have strengthened my conviction, which is that France and Great Britain, which are great powers, that both have considerable prestige and international influence, and a remarkable capital you might say of talent and know-how, these two countries must cooperate more together.

    As Winston Churchill said, more or less, history has in fact forged between our two peoples unshakeable, unbreakable bonds that cannot be undone. We have fought together for many centuries. Now we must give each other as much support as we possibly can. And that, my dear John, is the frame of mind which is mine at present and I know that you share these feelings.

    My dear John, we have known each other for a number of years and you have been good enough to give me your friendship, and I have done likewise. The affection – I think I can say – that exists between us, our affinities, are this deep attachment that we share for our cultures, our national traditions, all this gives a special dimension to our working relationships. And personally I quite honestly take great pleasure in this. It is very pleasant to be able to work with someone in this spirit of trust and friendship.

    I think we should say perhaps something also about the subject that is unmentionable, or wasn’t to be mentioned today, in other words beef. But you have broken the tryst, my dear John, and the contract therefore, may I say simply that I am surprised that there is no fillet de boeuf on the menu.

    And could I say that I very much hope that we will be able to strengthen something which is in the very nature of things, in other words a very strong bond of friendship between France and Great Britain.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at the Bosnia Peace Agreement Signing Ceremony – 14 December 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech at the Bosnia Peace Agreement Signing Ceremony, held at the Elysee Palace in Paris on Thursday 14th December 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I join others in thanking Jacques Chirac and the French Government for their hospitality.

    This is a fitting place for the Signing Ceremony.

    French forces, with those of the United Kingdom, have formed the backbone of the United Nations operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina over the past three years.

    Our troops have worked together in the hazardous tasks of peacekeeping and humanitarian relief. And they have suffered losses together.

    So it was especially heart-warming for us to see the release of your two brave pilots. Your firm stand was entirely vindicated.

    Mr President, much of Central and Eastern Europe has moved successfully from authoritarian rule to democracy.

    But of course such a profound change has produced areas of tension, instability and disorder. In the former Yugoslavia, sadly, it led to war.

    The international community could not prevent that war from breaking out. But it has worked patiently for peace.

    That peace has been won at a terrible price. One in twenty of the former inhabitants of Bosnia and Herzegovina has been killed. Over a quarter of the population have had to flee from their homes – homes which are mostly now in ruins.

    The conflict is over, but the job is only half done.

    Ahead lies hope but not yet fulfilment.

    Success will depend crucially on respect for the fundamental principles of this Agreement:

    – maintaining Bosnia and Herzegovina as a single multi-ethnic state;
    – providing for the safe return of refugees and turning away from the abomination of ethnic cleansing;
    – ensuring that the human rights of all the people of Bosnia fully and equally respected;
    – and bringing to justice those guilty of crimes against humanity.

    The Agreement signed today places clear and detailed obligations upon each of the parties. In their own interests, they must respect and implement them scrupulously.

    But the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina will not be alone in carrying through this Peace Agreement.

    From the time of the first London Conference in August 1992, the international community has made a huge commitment to them.

    Successive teams of negotiators – Lord Carrington and Cyrus Vance, Lord Owen and Thorvald Stoltenberg, Carl Bildt, the United Nations and the Contact Group – did not spare themselves in laying the groundwork for the peace finally achieved.

    Without a massive relief operation through UNPROFOR, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and other international and national agencies, the war’s dreadful toll would have been far higher.

    We must now make no less massive a commitment to the implementation of peace. 13,000 British troops will join the implementation force of some 60,000 overall – the biggest land operation undertaken in half a century of NATO’s existence.

    With the backing of the Peace Implementation Council set up last week, Carl Bildt will coordinate the vital task of re-establishing legitimate political structures and restoring normal civilian life.

    And the groundwork is now being laid for economic reconstruction, as a joint effort between Europe, North America, other interested countries, and the people of Bosnia themselves under, the coordination of the World Bank,

    It is now up to all of us – to the governments and peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina, of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and of Croatia, and to the external powers and international organisations – to turn ceasefire into peace, peace into a lasting settlement, and the countries of the former Yugoslavia into a stable and prosperous part of the European family.

    It will not be easy.

    But I profoundly believe it is possible.

    We must turn that possibility into reality.

    And today’s ceremony is an important landmark in that process.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Press Conference with President Chirac – 30 October 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s joint press conference with President Chirac, held in London on Monday 30th October 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Can I firstly welcome you to this press conference. This has been my seventh meeting with President Chirac in the last 6 months and on this occasion he has brought a very powerful team of his Ministers with him.

    This morning our Foreign Ministers, Defence Ministers, Finance Ministers, Transport Ministers, have all held separate discussions and subsequently reported to us about them. Collectively we have reached a number of wide ranging decisions.

    Let me just firstly say that this morning the President and I visited RAF Strike Command at High Wycombe. And we did so for two special reasons. Firstly, to inaugurate the Franco-British Air Group; and secondly, to present decorations to General and General Rose who worked so successfully for so long together in Bosnia.,

    I think that that ceremony, both the inauguration of the Air Group and the joint award of Honours, illustrates the increasingly close partnership that is developing between France and the United Kingdom. It is a global partnership and that theme of global partnership has been the dominant theme throughout this summit. Let me set out precisely what I mean by that.

    Britain and France are both European countries a worldwide outlook. We are the only nuclear powers in Western Europe. We each make a huge contribution to the overall defence of Europe. We are the largest European contributors to United Nations peacekeeping. We are Permanent Members of the United Nations Security Council and participants in the Economic Summits. And we both have obligations to parts of the world, like Africa, where we have long-standing and historic ties.

    In defence, upon which we spent a great deal of our time this morning, the President and I have concluded that the vital interests of one could not be threatened without the vital interests of the other equally being at risk.

    Step by step in defence, our approaches are moving closer together. In defence procurement, Britain has a wider range of joint projects with France than with any other country. We are discussing together the most effective structures for European defence, drawing on the lessons that we have learned In Bosnia.

    The Franco-British Euro-air Group is one bilateral dimension. We have decided on another – new arrangements for the Royal Navy and the French Navy to exercise and to train together.

    We have made important progress in deepening our nuclear cooperation. Our aim is to strengthen deterrence whilst retaining the independence of our nuclear forces. This deepening of cooperation will strengthen the overall European contribution to deterrence.

    Our Armed Forces, taking all aspects together, are closer today than at any time in the last 50 years, and the President and I shall look for yet further defence cooperation.

    We discussed the full range of European questions. We have a different approach to some of those questions, but we agreed to work together on a number of aspects at the Intergovernmental Conference. Subsidiarity is an area where we have a shared interest and concern. Subsidiarity – that is keeping or returning decision-making to the national level. We discussed, and have a common interest, in a more effective common foreign and security policy based on an intergovernmental agreement. We have a common approach to justice and home affairs matters and for the role of national parliaments. And we agreed to continue discussion on these and a number of other aspects that we are likely to face at the Intergovernmental Conference.

    We spent some time discussing the removing of regulations and red tape. We both agreed that small businesses had a vital role to play in our economies as generators both of employment in the future and of growth. And we have decided therefore to launch a joint initiative to reduce burdens on business and will invite businessmen from both countries to contribute to that work.

    Both of us have long, historic and very strong interests in Africa. We are launching today a joint initiative on conflict resolution and peacekeeping in Africa. We shall help African countries to develop their own capabilities and shall invite Western European Union partners to join us in sending advisory teams to Africa.

    You should, I hope, find on your chairs a detailed note of further joint approaches which we will take in Africa. These include a number of matters which you may wish to raise in questions but will not detain you with now.

    Let me just highlight four others of the many subjects we discussed.

    The first of these is Bosnia. We will continue working closely together on Bosnia and will both make a large contribution to the peace negotiations and the implementation of a peace settlement.

    Second, terrorism. I deplore the recent bombings that there have been in France. I have promised President Chirac every possible assistance and we have agreed on specific steps to enhance cooperation between France and the United Kingdom in dealing both with terrorism and with organised crime.

    On United Nations reform, about which we both spoke at the UN meeting just a few days ago, we both want to see effective follow through to the work of the G8.

    And finally, on a very positive note, we are launching the Entente Cordial Scholarship Scheme. This is an imaginative scheme that will be privately funded to help young people in Britain and in France to study in each other’s language and in each other’s country.

    Those are just the sketchy headlines of what has been, I think we both believe, a particularly productive summit.

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    I have nothing to add to the substance of what the Prime Minister has said, I have nothing to change in what he has said.

    As to the specific details, we shall be happy, both of us, to take questions from the press and I am very happy to welcome members of the British, French and other press corps as well.

    But let me make one comment, if I may, to start with. I have been attending French/British meetings for many years now and I have followed how these meetings have progressed and I am most struck by the sea-change which has occurred in our discussions. In Franco/British relations today there is no trace whatsoever of a gracility of ill humour. I think it has become quite natural for us to talk about everything, to discuss everything frankly and openly, to discuss matters which bring us together as well as matters which can divide us. But there is no drama about it, it happens quite naturally and openly.

    And on an increasing number of subjects all the time we have increasingly convergent views on these issues which are the challenges for our countries in the future. In other words, we have a greater and greater awareness all the time of the increasing solidarity of the destiny of our two countries, and that is extremely pleasant, this friendly atmosphere, this atmosphere of friendship which goes beyond us politicians but which concerns our countries and our systems. And I am very struck and impressed by this increasing closeness between France and Britain.

    QUESTION:

    President Chirac, particularly on the point of terrorism, do you think the British government is doing everything it can to prevent a spill-over from the Algerian war taking place in Britain and to stop Britain being used as a haven by Islamic radicals?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    As far as the fight against terrorism is concerned, I do not think, I am absolutely convinced that the British government is fully determined to do everything it can. I am convinced that there is excellent cooperation between the British and French services involved. And I have only thanks to express to the British authorities on these two scores.

    I would add that the Prime Minister wished to go beyond even that and proposed to me a strengthening of our cooperation in the fight against terrorism, and he also proposed to me that we should strengthen our cooperation in the fight against drugs, and I thoroughly agree with him on those two counts.

    QUESTION:

    Could I ask you both what the significance to Anglo/French relations, and indeed to nuclear cooperation, you find in the British decision to back French nuclear testing over the protestations of the Commonwealth?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let me respond to that point first. President Chirac had scientific advice about the necessity to test the French nuclear deterrent. I think on the back of that scientific advice it would have been extremely difficult for the head of any country not to have accepted that scientific advice and tested, as advised, his own nuclear deterrent. Upon that basis, I have offered the President my support for the action that he has taken. If one is a nuclear power there are certain obligations. Some of those obligations involve ensuring that the nuclear weapon is in proper order, that it is working as expected. And one does need in those circumstances to test, if that is the advice one is given. That is the advice the President was given, he accepted that advice. Frankly, I believe he had no choice and upon that basis I have offered him my support.

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    Support for which I am most grateful and which is also part and parcel of the solidarity of countries of the European Union. But I would also like to say that I was fully aware of the reaction that international public opinion would have when I took my decision. But the decision was absolutely inevitable for the safety and the reliability of French nuclear weapons. It would have been irresponsible of me not to take that decision. That is the negative answer to your question if you like. But there is a positive answer to your question too, which is that I am now in a position to confirm that France, as the United Kingdom, will sign the full Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and that France and the United Kingdom have both said that they will support the zero option on on-site controls, no small tests, no tests whatsoever, that France and the United Kingdom have just signed the Protocols of the Ruratonga Treaty which next spring will make it possible to declare the South Pacific a nuclear-free zone. And therefore there will be no further problem of nuclear testing.

    The United States, as you know, have agreed too to the zero option. In my recent discussions with the Russian President I understood him to say that that would be Russia’s position too. I am not answering in Russia’s place of course but I understood that would be his position. And I would not rule out China taking the same position too, and that would be a very optimistic and positive conclusion to the whole affair.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The President, on behalf of France, the Americans and the British have agreed to sign the Protocols to the Ruratonga Convention. I think that is very welcome. What we can actually now see, not very far in the future, just a few months away, is an end to nuclear testing and the signature of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. That is now, with luck, just a matter of months away and I think that is great progress and I am delighted about that.

    QUESTION (Jon Snow, Channel 4 News):

    When you became President, one of the earliest public pronouncements you made, or one that was recognised worldwide, was the offer to send French troops to save the people of Srebrenica. The Dutch government has today published its findings over what happened in Srebrenica and sad reading they make. The Dutch Defence Minister says that the whole concept of the so-called safe areas failed dismally. Could I ask you both whether as members of the Permanent Five Security Council of the UN you accept any culpability, any blame, for what went wrong and the fact that we are now sitting in a situation in which 8,000 citizens of that area are either dead or missing?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    You are referring of course to events which occurred as I became President. I believe that the United Nations forces were not able to fulfil the role that they were supposed to play. And I think it was wrong in the past to accept that confusion between a military role and a humanitarian role and the result was that events of that kind did occur. Who was responsible? Certainly not the United Nations because the United Nations was not given to proper mandate to act. I think it was a collective responsibility, I think that the British and French governments realised that when they decided together to react to what happening, to change their policies and to set up together the Rapid Reaction Force. And a lot of observers made fun of the Rapid Reaction Force when it was announced initially, but it did make it possible to give the troops the resources they needed to attain their objective, which was a peacekeeping objective and which was I think behind the positive developments that we have witnessed since.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think it is perhaps sometimes a little too easy to overlook the reality that it is the British and the French, and their troops on the ground, who have played the biggest single role of turning what looked like at one stage a trans-Balkan war, and at another stage like the mass genocide and slaughter of huge numbers of people, into a position where across central Bosnia there is peace and where we can now look forward to the possibility of a peace right the way across Bosnia. That would not have happened but for the action of the British and French governments who sent the largest number of troops and sent the troops not only in the largest numbers but sent them earliest. There were also those countries who participated predominantly in the conferences that were held and that determined with the Rapid Reaction Corps to respond to some of the events that were occurring. So, no-one doubts the horrors from the early genocide and subsequently what occurred in the former Yugoslavia, but I think the British and French troops played the predominant role in mitigating the slaughter and saving lives. And I do not think it an exaggerated claim to say that but for the activities of British and French soldiers and their commanders, there are literally hundreds of thousands of people alive today who would otherwise have been dead. And I think in the scales of who did what and what the outcome was, that is something that should weigh heavily.

    QUESTION (George Jones, Daily Telegraph):

    Could you clarify this statement where you say you do not see situations arising where the vital interests of either France or the United Kingdom could be threatened – is that like the NATO declaration that if one country is invaded, could you tell us what it means?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    I don’t think I need to elaborate a great deal on this. We are very strongly linked politically, economically, culturally and geographically, and I am not referring to the Channel fixed link. I am referring quite clearly to the fact that we are very close to each other. But clearly one cannot imagine a situation where in the immediate future or in the foreseeable future a conflict might occur in which France and Britain would not be on the same side, we will clearly be on the same side, and I think we must draw some conclusions from that strategically speaking?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think really the point is quite straightforward. Neither the President nor I can conceive of circumstances in which in any way France was threatened militarily, in which the interests of the United Kingdom would not be seen to be similarly threatened. And equally the President can conceive of no circumstances in which the United Kingdom was threatened militarily that would not equally threaten the vital interests of France. And we thought it appropriate to make that point crystal clear on this occasion to exemplify the increasingly close cooperation we have in all aspects of defence.

    QUESTION:

    Mr President, 50 years ago, referring to somewhat complicated relationships with General de Gaulle, Winston Churchill said: “Of all the crosses I have to bear, the cross of Lorraine is the heaviest”. I would like to ask the successor of General de Gaulle, whether this is a heavy cross to bear on your shoulders? I am referring to the increasingly Euro-sceptical policy of Her Majesty’s Government or if that policy is a relief and a comfort for you?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    I must say I don’t know what Euro-scepticism is – is it a fad. And in every country of the European Union, not only the United Kingdom, there is such a phenomenon. So let us be realistic about this and if one is realistic, what does one see? What one sees is that there is considerable progress in European construction. There are areas in which France and the United Kingdom have a somewhat different approach. We discuss these differences and I say we discuss these differences quite equably and openly, it is certainly not a heavy cross to bear. And there are other areas in which our views are perfectly convergent, and the Prime Minister has told you what they are, everything which concerns the construction of a Europe which is closer to its citizens, on enlargement, on other issues. On these issues we have no conflict of views whatsoever. So let us not be ideological, we are pragmatic people. We are moving ahead at our own pace but very positively and without there being any misunderstanding between us.

    QUESTION:

    To come back to terrorism I have three somewhat distinct questions. First of all, the French government has stated that it is concerned about the fact that some Islamic fundamentalists may have taken refuge in the United Kingdom. Secondly, there is information to the effect that the SIS might open an office in London, the BBC announced this this afternoon. And thirdly, Abad Anas [phon], one of the founder members of SIS, is supposed to be in the UK and has made a request for political asylum. Can you comment?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    On the first question, my answer is no. There is no difference of view between us on that. On the other questions I have no comment to make. But I would refer you back to what was said earlier on which is that I consider that cooperation between France and the United Kingdom in the fight against terrorism is absolutely first class, it is efficient and I warmly welcome it.

    QUESTION:

    Could you tell us about what concrete steps have been taken to strengthen cooperation between the French and British governments in the fight against terrorism?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    When it comes to the fight against terrorism, it is not customary to announce publicly exactly what one is going to do, and I am sure you will understand that.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I will just add one point to that. Although the President is entirely right in saying that we do not announce publicly what the cooperation is, let me just say two things to you. Firstly, the cooperation is already close; and secondly, the President and I agreed this morning on ways to make it closer yet. Terrorism is a scourge to all countries and we will work very closely in dealing with it, but I am afraid that we are not going to tell people precisely what we shall be doing.

    QUESTION:

    Did you talk about who might be the next Secretary General of NATO, whether it is clear that there will be a British candidate, and if there is not then can you both tell me what you think of the candidature of Ruud Lubbers?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let me respond to that first. We did consider the possibility not of one, I saw one British name being floated in the press, there were in fact a number of British names that we considered. But we also looked at other names that were already in the field. Dr Lubbers is not yet a formal candidate, I should make that entirely clear. But were Dr Lubbers to be a formal candidate for the Secretary General of NATO, I think he would receive strong support from the British government.

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    And you will hardly be surprised to hear me say that there again we share the same view.

    QUESTION (John Craig, Daily Express):

    Prime Minister, do you agree that Euro-scepticism is a fad?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think there are many ways to describe Euro-realism, Euro-scepticism, Euro-philyism, Euro-phobism, there are all sorts of names. I think what is important is that one looks at the problems related to Europe with a clear and open mind and decides what is the answer most appropriate to the British interest and the European interest, and that is the way the government examines them.

    QUESTION (Tom Carver, BBC TV):

    Can both Presidents tell us what this new rapprochement that seems to exist is going to do for the much vaunted Franco-German axis that we have?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am grateful to be promoted to President but I fear it is not a title I can accept. I will leave the President to answer that.

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    The Franco-German friendship, let me put it that way, is part and parcel of our destiny for reasons of history and geography that I don’t need to elaborate on here. But also because we are two countries at the very heart of Europe it was always clear that Europe would never get anywhere unless there was a clear understanding between France and Germany. If there is no understanding between France and Germany, there will be no Europe, full-stop. But Europe is not only France and Germany, Europe is also a number of other countries and a leading country of course is the United Kingdom with its traditions, with its history. And the United Kingdom cannot be on the sidelines. Therefore the cooperation between France and Germany, the understanding between France and Germany is absolutely essential but it is not enough, there has to be something else and that something else is the British presence. Clearly that is a reflection of British interests. And I think France is in a position to facilitate that necessary synergies between the British view of things and say the German view of things. One always tends to imagine that there are very considerable differences of view, but when one gets down to them and when one looks at them very closely one realises there is no difference which cannot be reduced. And I believe that Franco-British cooperation, which is going from strength to strength every year and is gaining in strength at each one of our meetings, is one of the important points for a vision of a sound stable Europe developing strongly into the future.

    QUESTION:

    Did you discuss the Quebec referendum and what is the position of Paris and London?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    The referendum is going on this very day and you will hardly expect me, nor the British Prime Minister, to make any comment on that.

    QUESTION (Magreb Press):

    Why has it taken so long for the former dominant powers in Africa to launch the present initiative, that is conflict resolution and peacekeeping, and what prompted the move?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I suppose one could always have done a good thing earlier. I think the fact that the President and I have discussed this on more than one occasion. We both in our own backgrounds have a direct interest in parts of Africa, it was a matter that naturally arose in our conversations some time ago and that we have subsequently taken forward. It clearly is important. If you look at what has happened in Africa over the last few years there are some people who will say, well it is very depressing to look at the problems in Africa. I think that is at best a half truth, and at worst a complete untruth. Because many of the changes that have taken place in Africa have been very beneficial. Many of the African governments are struggling very hard to turn away from bad economic policies to sound economic policies. Many of the African countries that were not democracies are moving towards being democracies. Of course there are some areas where things are not yet right, but a great deal of progress has been made and both the President and I would like to lend a helping hand, where we can, to that process.

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    And I would just add one further point to that. There was reference earlier on to Euro-sceptics, now we are talking about Afro-pessimists. But I am neither one nor the other. And as far as Africa is concerned, I think that Africa is moving ahead in the right direction. And I fear that a lot of Afro-pessimists are in fact people who are trying to withdraw from Africa and trying to shuffle off the efforts which are necessary for the development of Africa. But I am optimistic for three reasons: firstly, Africa is moving ahead in the right direction; the rule of law is gaining ground; the management of public affairs in Africa is improving every year and that is I think clear when one looks at the increasing number of agreements which are entered into with the international financial institutions; thirdly, today African nations have understood that there are two things they must do – first of all they have to take into account regional interests and they also have to be involved in conflict resolution in order to avoid conflicts as far as that is possible. And those three developments I think are liable to give greater confidence to African peoples but also to Europeans who wish to participate in the development of Africa and that is why I am an Afro-optimist.

    QUESTION:

    You talked about advances in European construction thanks to excellent Franco-British cooperation, particularly on defence matters. But when you discuss matters like the EMS, the single currency, the IGC, is that not likely to hold back European construction, is that not pragmatism too?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I mentioned some of the areas in terms of what is loosely called European construction. I am always wary when people talk of European construction, it means different things to different people.

    As far as the Intergovernmental Conference is concerned, I set out a series of areas where it is clear already, before the Intergovernmental Conference begins, that there is a broadly common interest between the British position and the French position. There will not be unanimity on every issue between Britain and France, or indeed I suspect between almost any two countries in the European Union, total unanimity is a very rare proposition. But there is a good deal of unanimity and we will try and build on that in the Intergovernmental Conference. There will be some things that will be unacceptable to some nations and that is a matter that will need to be determined in the conference when it begins next year.

    As far as Monetary Union is concerned, the British position on that is well known, our position has not changed. I set it out pretty clearly in the Maastricht negotiations when I obtained for the British the right to opt-out of a Single European currency if that is formed and if it is not thought to be in the British interests to join. That was the position and that remains the position.

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    Just one comment as far as France is concerned. Let me first of all point out, if I may, that each time a debate of this kind gets going we are told that things are going very badly. But I think it is quite beyond challenge that Europe is progressing. Some people find that Europe is not moving ahead as quickly as possible, some people say not as well as possible, but basically it is moving ahead. Soon after I became President, France was the President of the European Council and I hosted a meeting in Cannes of 15 Heads of State and Government, plus 11 Heads of State and Government of countries which may one day become members of the European Union, and I have no recollection of there ever being a venture of this kind in history. Nobody thinks today that there could be such a thing as a war in Europe, if one excludes the unfortunate affair of ex-Yugoslavia. So I think that is real progress.

    Once you have got that far, you have of course other issues to deal with – the Intergovernmental Conference, the need to adjust the European institutions to an increasing number of member countries. That is necessary. Well we shall be tackling that issue and we shall be thinking pragmatically once again about the ways in which we can succeed in that reform. And on several points France, the United Kingdom, Germany, see eye to eye, on other points there are differences. Fine. But that is what diplomats are there for and that is precisely why we agree on a certain period of time necessary to come to an agreement. But I don’t doubt that eventually we shall come to an agreement on the best institutions which are best suited to the principles of each country and I hope that Europe will be enlarged, that it will be closer to its citizens thanks to the application of the principle of subsidiarity on which both British and French and Germans fully agree.

    Then you raised the issue of the currency, a big debate on the currency. You are familiar with the position I took during the French debate on Maastricht, I came out in favour of [indistinct] today I have made it very clear that whatever efforts need to be made and of course those efforts have to be properly distributed in France, but France will meet the conditions which will enable it to become a member of the single currency on 1 January 1999 – that is the French option. And I don’t think anybody can challenge today that France has the political will to do that because it is in our interests and we believe it is in our interests because it requires us to reduce our budget deficit and it is only by reducing our budget deficits that we shall be able to rise to the challenge of unemployment, and that is my objective, to fight against unemployment. Clearly fighting against unemployment means sound management and sound exchanges. France being what it is, I believe the single currency is a positive thing for France, it is something which will enable France to fight effectively against unemployment and to maintain social cohesion, which is something also which I have stated a great deal. And I would also say that it is a great French tradition, the single currency basically is an assertion of the stability of exchange rates, that is the objective of the single currency. And France’s objective, France’s view of things, has always been in favour of the stability of exchange rates. That was one of the major hobby-horses of General de Gaulle, whom you referred to earlier on, and it remains France’s unwavering position on monetary issues.

    The British Prime Minister has just recalled his position, which we are amply familiar. The United Kingdom, which does not have the same characteristics, the same constraints as France does, does not wish to have its hands tied. It wishes to keep full freedom to take that decision if and when it feels it is in its interests to do so. And I would observe that the UK will fulfil the criteria for monetary union if it wishes to embark upon it because its economic management is sound and reasonable. So the UK will have its hands entirely free to take the decision it feels fit to take and it will take that choice when it feels appropriate to do so. I am sure we will discuss it beforehand and I am sure the British government will discuss it with its British partners. We must respect the freedom of choice of the British government in this respect.

    QUESTION:

    Could you clarify something the Prime Minister said about global partnership. Does that mean that it is easier to have common foreign policy between countries which have a worldwide presence than within the 15 countries of the European Union?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No, that was not what it was intended to convey. Though a common foreign policy, agreed by unanimity and not imposed by qualified majority vote, is a very attractive proposition for Europe.

    Clearly collectively if the whole of Europe agrees to a foreign policy then we are in a stronger position than if any one or two countries themselves agreed. But the remark I made about global partnership was not particularly geared to one aspect of policy like foreign policy, but geared to the range of interests that I set out, and the President set out, that are common both to France and the United Kingdom. We are the only two European nations that are nuclear powers, that have a worldwide interest, that sit on the United Nations Security Council, that have long-standing historical interests in large parts of the world like Africa and it is upon that basis that we have a common outlook on many problems. And it was that common outlook, based on common background, common history and common interests, that led the President and I to conclude that there was ample scope for a global partnership. And as we have indicated in defence and other areas, there are large areas that illustrate in very practical terms the extent of partnership that already exists today between Britain and France and we have both reiterated our determination to sustain those areas of agreement and to build on them wherever and whenever we think it appropriate.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Press Conference with President Chirac – 10 June 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s joint press conference with President Jacques Chirac, held in Paris on Saturday 10th June 1995.

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    Ladies and Gentlemen, allow me first of all to thank the British foreign and defence journalists who are present here today following our conversations and I would like also to begin by saying it is very pleasant to have such conversations among friends.

    I will not surprise you in saying that our conversations were very cordial and allowed us to raise a certain number of issues. First of all regarding the Cannes Summit preparations and a number of European issues, in particular the preparation to the run-up of the Intergovernmental Conference in 1996. It is true to say that we have a number of approaches and views in common, in particular with respect to the role of the Council and that also of the association of Parliament in contributing to the work being done in Europe. So on those issues we have common approaches and common ground.

    [small section inaudible] and indeed the recent initiatives have been taken in common and, as you know, were approved yesterday by the Fifteen. We request the immediate release and freeing of hostages; we want considerable diplomatic efforts to be deployed and in particular with respect to the appointment of a mediator, Mr Carl Bildt; and in particular also the setting up of the Rapid Reaction Force which will allow for additional support to be given to the peace-keepers in the field. As you know, the Rapid Reaction Force will be made up primarily of British and French troops, to which will be added a Dutch contingent and possibly contingents from two or three other countries.

    With respect to transatlantic relations we were thinking along the same lines, namely the strengthening of Euro-American relations with respect of course for the identities of both sides.

    Regarding bilateral matters, there are no major difficulties there, we both want to strengthen our cooperation in a variety of different fields, in particular the military field.

    With respect to future meetings we have decided that we will meet on 29 July, probably in France, on the occasion of a visit that the Prime Minister will be paying to France at that time. And on 30 October next we will hold the next Franco-British Summit, which will be convened in London, and preceded by a dinner and some evening entertainment on the evening prior to the 30th.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Jacques, thank you very much. The President has set out much of the detail of our discussions this morning and I will simply say that I share the views that he has expressed.

    We have had some two hours of talks and my expectation that they would be very wide-ranging and very worthwhile have not been disappointed, they were an excellent exchange.

    Let me turn particularly to the area of Bosnia where we both have a very great concern about present events. Throughout the last three years, Britain and France together have assumed the lion’s share of UNPROFOR’s burden in Bosnia. In Bosnia British troops serve under French command, French Marines and French Legionnaires serve under the British command, and that is the true reality of European defence cooperation. And I would like to pay my one tribute to the 39 French troops who have lost in Bosnia over the last 3 years. We admire what they have done very much and I very much respect also the very brave action of French troops on the bridge at Sarajevo.

    Let me remind you once again precisely why British and French troops are in Bosnia. We are there for humanitarian reasons, we are there to save lives and feed the starving. We are also there for strategic reasons. I believe it is a vital role for British and French troops to help contain a conflict which, if it is not contained, has the potential to ignite the whole of the Balkans.

    That is why, for so long as British troops can carry out their duties without undue risk to their lives, I shall want to see them continue to play their role in UNPROFOR. But let me add also, if the warring parties make it impossible for the United Nations to carry out their mandate, then of course we would have to consider withdrawal. But that is not, emphatically not, our wish.

    Let me make it very plain. If it became necessary for the United Nations Protection Forces to leave, and I repeat I very much hope that will not be the case, but if it were to happen then I think everyone in Bosnia, Serb Croat or Muslim, would suffer as a result of their withdrawal.

    Britain and France are now cooperating very closely indeed, the cooperation is on a daily basis at political level, at military level, at diplomatic level and at other official levels. And we have three immediate tasks. Let me set out all of them;

    – the first of them is to use the reinforcements which both our countries are sending to help UNPROFOR do its job more effectively. And I announced yesterday that the 5,000 troops of our Airmobile Brigade have now been given orders to deploy. They will take effect as soon as some logistical problems with the United Nations are concluded;

    – secondly, let me make it clear that they are not going there as an aggressive force to make war, they are going there to keep the peace. But British troops have always responded robustly if they are attacked and they have responded robustly to provocation. They will continue to do that. The second task is to make clear to the Bosnian Serbs that they need to release all of the hostages unconditionally and they do their cause no good whatsoever by hanging on to them;

    – and the third task of course is to stay focused on the overriding objective and that must remain a negotiated settlement.

    Let me just briefly indicate the other areas that we discussed. We had a very worthwhile exchange on the forthcoming European summit at Cannes. We discussed a range of matters – unemployment, subsidiarity, deregulation, competitiveness and the launch of the Study Group. There were no difficulties of any significance between us in those issues.

    The one area of difference that the President mentioned is an area we are examining and I hope and expect we will reach an agreement before Cannes. We have shared objectives on aid flows and different mechanisms to meet them but we will reach an accommodation about that I hope.

    We found ourselves in agreement on the objectives for the G7 summit at Halifax and similarly we found ourselves in agreement on a range of matters related to transatlantic relationships.

    So let me just say, before we invite your questions, how much I have enjoyed this visit and how much I appreciate the hospitality that has been given. It has been a very good occasion for Britain, a very good occasion for France and I think rather a good occasion for Europe as well.

    QUESTION:

    I have two questions. You talked about the convergence of British and French views with respect to the 1996 conference, but I would like to know whether there are no divergences here. In particular I am thinking of the issue of qualified majority voting on the Council of Ministers? My second question has to do with the issue of transatlantic relations, I would like to know what you feel about the proposal made, in particular by Sir Leon Brittan, with respect to a transatlantic free trade zone?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    Taking your question on voting and the qualified majority system, these are matters that have to do with how to implement the decisions that will be taken at the IGC and I think it is too soon for us to consider them here. In fact we did not talk about such matters, it will be up to our experts to give consideration to these issues. However, having said that I do not expect there to be any difficulties, in fact I would go so far as to say that we will be in agreement on that.

    On your question with respect to the free trade zone mooted by Sir Leon Brittan, anything we feel that can facilitate trade is necessarily positive, is necessary to be supported. France of course is paying great attention to the proper establishment, the getting going of the World Trade Organisation before any free trade measures are taken along the lines of those suggested. That being said on the general principle, there is certainly no objection and no disagreement.

    QUESTION:

    I wonder if I could ask President Chirac, and perhaps a special request for a response in English if that would be all right? Did the two of you agree that the judgement is that the Rapid Response Force is now the last chance for keeping the UNPROFOR troops on the ground in Bosnia? And secondly, what sort of representations will you be planning to make to President Clinton?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t think anyone is in the business of saying the Rapid Reaction Corps is the last chance, that is not the purpose of the Rapid Reaction Corps, the Rapid Reaction Corps is there to facilitate the work that goes on, to protect the troops that are there to enable them to carry out the work that they are doing. It is not there to wage an aggressive war. It is there to protect people, to respond where appropriate and to try and ensure the work that goes on. So, far from being the last chance, it is intended to ensure that the present work continues for some time. The solution to the problems of Bosnia is not going to be found on a battlefield, the solution is going to be found in a political settlement and a search for a political settlement will go on.

    The advent of a Rapid Reaction Corps and the reinforcement of the United Nations troops is a very important event indeed, in keeping the work that is going on on the ground in Bosnia in being and ensuring that it continues. But I don’t think either of us would see that as a last chance at all. We will continue to seek for both the diminution of fighting, the maximum amount of humanitarian aid, the maximum amount of protection for our troops and we will continue to push very hard for a sensible pragmatic political outcome to this dispute.

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    We share the same point of view on these matters. The issue of the objectives and aims that have motivated the establishment of this Rapid Reaction Force is something we totally agree on. I note furthermore that neither President Clinton nor President Yeltsin have expressed any reservations about this initiative. You see there was a situation that simply could not last, The UNPROFOR troops have been deployed throughout the territory and they are stretched very thin with relatively limited military means at their disposal and we have seen the emergence and rise of a certain number of phenomena, aggressive phenomena and situations in which these troops have had to face humiliation and that is something we could not accept. The Rapid Reaction Force is a means of ensuring that our troops never again find themselves in a situation whereby they are humiliated. They can fight, they may unfortunately be injured or even sadly killed, but one thing they will never have to face again is humiliation.

    QUESTION (Reuters):

    Prime Minister, in the light of your discussions this morning and what we have heard from both of you, do you feel that you have a new ally in Paris, particularly on European Union affairs, and that perhaps Britain is not as alone on those affairs as it was in the past.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Paul, if I didn’t know better I would think you were being mischievous. I have always found in my relationship with the French government and with the President of France that both sides to the discussions speak their mind plainly and clearly. We are concerned about the way Europe develops and we are concerned about the individual interests of Britain and France in Europe. I think that was the case with President Mitterrand, I think it is the case now with President Chirac, I have found our discussions this morning very amiable. There are many areas of very great agreement, some of them have been very evident I think in the discussions we have had this morning and in the questions indeed that you have asked this morning. There may be areas at some stage in the future where there are divergent views, as there are between any two countries you care to name in the European Union. But I do think that the relationship between Britain and France is a very ancient relationship. On the really important matters we tend to be on the same side more often than not. I think that is going to remain the case, I cannot promise you we will agree on every issue and neither can President Chirac.

    I can say the relationship is very good and where we differ it will be on matters of political substance, it will not be a matter that will bite deeply and damagingly into the British/French relationship.

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    I would like to add one thing in respect to the construction of Europe. I believe that the construction of Europe, in other words the strengthening, the permanent constant strengthening of the links between European countries, is a sine qua non for the future existence of Europe. Franco-German relations are therefore necessary for the construction of Europe but not in themselves sufficient. We cannot possibly build Europe without Britain. It is therefore essential that we understand the specific problems that Britain faces. And I believe that France can play an important role in finding the necessary impetus and synergy which is necessary to the building of Europe between all European partners and of course in particular France, Germany and Britain.

    QUESTION (James Robbins, BBC):

    President, in the discussions at Cannes on technical preparations for a single currency, should the matter of a name for the single currency be discussed, should a name be decided at a fairly early stage so that European citizens have an idea of what this thing would be called. What would be your preferred choice? The Prime Minister told the House of Commons in London this week that arguably circumstances might never arise in which it would be right for Britain to join the single currency, was that a disappointment to you?

    PRESIDENT CHIRAC:

    On the first point I would say that we are not on the agenda of the Cannes Summit intending to discuss the name of the single currency. And on your second question, I know and I understand the British analysis and view of the single currency. And there is at least one point on which John Major and myself agree. In other words, the consequences of a single currency, the impact of a single currency which would bring together perhaps 5 or 6 or even 7 Community country members, on the economic situation and status of the Union as a whole, in other words the Union as made up of member states that would not have a single currency, have been insufficiently thought about and insufficiently studied. And therefore it is necessary to examine the situation very objectively and as speedily as possible. I for one of course am in favour of France respecting and upholding the commitments it made under Maastricht and France will of course make all necessary efforts to meet these commitments and indeed meet the terms set for the launching of a single European currency under the Maastricht Treaty and under the provisions of the treaty, in other words by 1st January 1999.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let me add just a point about this because this is a matter that the President and I discussed at some length this morning. The unspoken presupposition in much of the early thinking about a single currency was that everybody would be able to join at the same time. But of course the European Union is changing and it is expanding and there are new members coming in, so it is no longer a practical proposition to assume that every member of the European Union would be able to enter a single currency, if it wished to, at the same time. And as the President said, one has to look at these realities and see what they might mean. They raise very important questions, not just for monetary union itself but for other aspects of working of the European Union as a whole. And I personally find it a breath of fresh air that these important matters are finally coming to the fore and will be examined, and I look forward to the examination.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Paris – 9 June 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s doorstep interview in Paris on Friday 9th June 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let me just, before I take a few questions, say a word or two about this evening’s meeting. It was a very businesslike meeting indeed, we covered a very great deal of ground and I am looking forward very much to the bilateral with President Chirac tomorrow morning. We have a lot to discuss tomorrow but we traipsed a little over some of the ground we will look at in our discussions with colleagues this evening.

    Three principal areas that we discussed this evening: the forthcoming European conference at Cannes and a range of issues that are on the agenda; the European Union/American summit where President Chirac will represent the European Union in a few days time; and the G7 summit at Halifax.

    We spent a long time in the midst of those discussions also looking at the present and future policy on Bosnia, what had happened, the chance of a diplomatic settlement, the role of the International Rapid Reaction Corps and the British Rapid Reaction Corps when it arrives there in due course.

    If I can run through those different items. Insofar as the European/American summit was concerned, there were a range of matters discussed, the possibility of improving trade relations, the European attitude on a number of matters where we have a mutual interest with the Americans, Bosnia of course being the most obvious example. Not a great deal there I think to talk to you about.

    As far as the G7 summit was concerned, we had quite a significant discussion about the prospect of reform of United Nations institutions, clearly something that President Chirac feels strongly about, as indeed do the United Kingdom. A number of other colleagues expressed fairly strong views about that as well and that is clearly going to be an important subject when we get to Halifax.

    Also some discussion about unemployment generally both in relation to Halifax and in relation to the Cannes Summit. Most of our time was spent on various elements of what will be discussed at Cannes. The Commission will table their Green Paper on Economic and Monetary Union. No decisions were taken about that this evening and no decisions are expected to be taken at Cannes. What will happen, I think is a fairly thorough discussion of the Green Paper to set, if I can use the European phrase, an orientation for the Study Group that will continue its work, well we frankly don’t know how long, perhaps up to Christmas, perhaps in time to report at Madrid, perhaps not.

    We discussed the progress we were making towards being able to establish Europol and a range of other issues that are likely to come up in Cannes.

    A number of people stressed in the discussions that we will have at Cannes that whilst of course they were looking at the Green Paper on Economic and Monetary Union, it was important to make sure that the European Union became a good deal more relevant to people right across Europe. In that respect I think it was perhaps the most down to earth and practical discussion of this sort that I have heard amongst European Heads of Government for quite a long time. There was considerable interest about what might be done practically to assure people across Europe that the European Heads of Government were concerned about the levels of unemployment.

    There was quite a discussion about the relative lack of speed with which the Trans-European networks had proceeded and some irritation that not more had happened. I am sure at Cannes a firm impetus to those will almost certainly be given.

    That is a fairly sketchy outline of what was a fairly vivacious two and a half hours and one I very much enjoyed.

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, did you commit your government tonight to link all the EMU convergence targets that have been agreed, and whether you think at Cannes there will be discussion about the name of the single currency?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    On the latter point, I am not expecting discussion on the name of the single currency. Most certainly if anyone is planning to raise it at Cannes there was absolutely no mention of it this evening, either directly or implicitly with somebody hinting that might be on the agenda. It certainly was not discussed at all this evening. As far as the convergence criteria was concerned, there was a lot of discussion about the convergence criteria, I think almost everybody mentioned their importance, and indeed it was the British who were instrumental in having the convergence criteria written into the Maastricht Treaty. Nobody this evening re-committed themselves to the Maastricht criteria, we have all committed ourselves to them in the past. As far as the United Kingdom is concerned, we committed ourselves to them because we think they are sensible economic criteria in any event, quite separate from their necessity if anyone proposes to move forward to Stage III of EMU. But there was no commitment by anyone especially tonight but there was a great deal of discussion about how important they are.

    QUESTION:

    On Bosnia, have there been sufficient offers of extra troops from other countries to the Rapid Reaction Force, and those offers that there have been, do they mean that Europe as well as Britain is prepared to get in deeper in Bosnia?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    There was a great deal of support this evening. This evening was not the occasion for people to offer extra commitment, though the Dutch certainly have and I expect that others will do so. But nobody was in the business of doing that this evening, it was not that sort of discussion. What I should have mentioned to you earlier, and neglected to do so, was that we did agree this evening that Carl Bildt should be appointed as the single negotiator for the European Union. Whether he will represent the whole of the Contact Group is a matter still to be decided, that has not been determined among the Contact Group. It may be that that will be what happens, it would be a perfectly acceptable outcome from my point of view were that to be the case, but that is not agreed yet. But we did agree unanimously, and with some enthusiasm, that Carl Bildt would become the single European Union negotiator in future.

    QUESTION:

    Do you share the same point of view of President Chirac concerning Bosnia?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We have worked very closely over the past few weeks on the question of Bosnia. Britain and France have very large troop contingents either there or going to be there and we have had right from the start. The proposition that Carl Bildt should replace David Owen was very much an Anglo-French proposition. So I think it fair to say that the relationship between France and the United Kingdom on this issue could scarcely have been closer. We will both be offering logistical help to Carl Bildt, both in terms of military advice and other logistical back-up, France will be doing that and so will Britain, and we will continue to work very closely together.

    QUESTION:

    Does that mean that Mr Stoltenberg steps aside?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    That is not entirely clear yet.

    QUESTION:

    When will you be considering using strength in order to free the hostages in Bosnia?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t think anyone is imagining the Rapid Reaction Force are to be used in that fashion. They are there to protect troops and they are there in case they are needed. I think sometimes there is some dispute about how robust they are going to be. Perhaps I should say to you now that the rules of engagement that the troops have been operating on ever since they went there have been pretty robust. If the British troops are attacked the British troops will respond and they will respond vigorously. But they are not there as an aggressive force, they are there to protect people and they are there to protect their own troops. They are not there to make war, they are not there to wage war, they are not there to be aggressive, but when attacked they will certainly robustly respond and that will not be new on the British side, that has been the position right from the outset. I think we have probably had more robust rules of engagement than anybody else from the moment our troops have been there.

    QUESTION:

    The Irish Prime Minister has made representations to you about the possible freeing of Private Lee Clegg, what has been your response to what he said?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I have not had the opportunity to discuss that. I hope to have the opportunity of seeing the Irish Prime Minister very shortly and I hope certainly, if we have not met before, that we will have the chance of a bilateral at Cannes, but we have not had the chance to discuss that. In any event, there is a proper procedure that is now under consideration as far as Private Clegg is concerned and that procedure must go through its normal procedures, there is nothing more that can be done other than that. It is in course of examination at the moment. In due course a recommendation will go to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and he will then make a decision but that is not something that anyone else can interfere with, it is for him.

    QUESTION:

    Mr Bruton says that he would like the remission procedures to be reviewed with a view to accelerating releases?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t think it is helpful to anyone to make those sorts of points at the moment, it is not helpful for me to go into those points at the moment and I am not proposing to. I have not had a chance of discussing these matters with John Bruton tonight, when we have discussed them no doubt we will come and talk to you all about them, as we usually do, but not tonight.

    QUESTION:

    Jacques Santer has proposed setting up a working group as a sort of fledgling State Department for the whole of Europe, what is your position on moves towards a common Foreign Office for Europe at this stage?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We are certainly not in favour of subsuming the independent pillars in to the central pillar of the European Union, that has certainly been the case, the two inter-governmental pillars we propose should remain intergovernmental, we don’t foresee them being subsumed under central Commission control. That was and is our position and that is most unlikely to change. In terms of making a common foreign policy more effective, well we are very much in favour of making common foreign policy more effective but it has to be on an intergovernmental basis and on no other basis.