Former French Prime minister, Michel Rocard Denounces a Frightening Danger of Nuclear War
March 3, 2012 • 1:52PM

In an interview to the daily Liberation on March 2nd to present his latest book “Mes points sur les I”, Michel Rocard really took off his gloves, denouncing the “political collective imbecility” dominating in the ongoing presidential campaign in France, in a context where dangers of “an uncommon gravity” are looming against the world.

Among the main dangers raised by the former Prime minister: a nuclear world war, the extension of xenophobia and potential “civil war” emerging as a result of the anti-nuclear de- growth policies !

Responding to a question on « what is his greatest preoccupation in foreign policy », Rocard says :”Nobody is looking at the Middle-East. We have there an Americano-English strategy, accepted by others, notably by ourselves, whose aim is to torpedo any possibility of serious discussions with the Iranians. And we even engage in some provocations from time to time. As if the aim was to prepare a climate of tolerance to make Israeli strikes acceptable. In this hypothesis, the war would be Irano-syrian, supported by China and Russia, as we saw at the UN, against generally, the West and its clients. And Europe is mute. This is an affaire of millions of dead, the hypothesis being that it would be nuclear from the beginning. I know well those dossiers and I have never been so frightened. (…) what is new, is the intensity of dangers in comparison to a futile state of mind”.

Rocard targets then the « increasing xenophobia » which he says bluntly « makes me sick ». He attacks the “pleasure we indulge in when speaking about immigration and about the unrest that foreigners create at home”. But “whatever the verbal intensity, the vigour of hatred and the pleasure that National Front militants or those of Sarkozy indulge in as they observe those Frenchmen who refuse to live with one another, all that will not change anything, and it will rot everything”.

Michel Rocard then targets the delicate problem of energy. In his book he makes a vibrant call for civilian nuclear power and a powerful attack against any illusions concerning renewable energies.

“We all want an energy which doesn’t kill, and (…) which respects our ecology. Unfortunately we don’t yet have the scientific solutions which could make renewable energies financially accessible in order to integrate them into the functioning of our economies.

Wind and solar energies, the two most common, don’t allow us to generate kilowatt hours in the billions. Yet, our need is in the hundreds of billions. Countries such as Denmark and Germany which played that card too strongly and too soon, will have problems because they will have to pay wind energy at exorbitant prices. (…) If no alternative is found, at present we are moving fast towards a moment where the very strong fall of available fossil fuels will lead to a very strong fall in the GDP. Thus whoever says that we must renounce to nuclear power is explaining to us that we have to accept de-growth. And there, I make a hypothesis, the only one in the book, that the obligation of de-growth will lead to a civil war”.

Elaborating on this theme of the link between de-growth and civil war, Michel Rocard comes

to the Greek situation, underlining that if there is an attempt to impose a 25% reduction on living standards to that country, that cannot be done without « a military power ».

Between financial powers and populations, however, Michel Rocard makes the right choice: “it becomes more and more indispensable to cancel everywhere a good part of the unplayable debt”.

And he proposes as his main measure : « the absolute spearation between deposit and credit banks and investment banks » which allowed us to avoid any financial crisis durint in the course of the 60 years of its application.

Michel Rocard who recognizes that Nicolas Sarkozy showed a certain ability to understand the nature of the present financial crisis, denounces however those “terrible words he uttered, when he said that nothing should be undertaken that could weaken the banking system, and especially not take away from it the possibility of making money with the deposits of Frenchmen.”

To a last question on what he thought François Hollande would have as manoeuvring room to deal with the crisis were he to be elected, Rocard reacts strongly saying that the separation of banks “costs nothing”, and explains that “the real maneuvering room, is the level of political comprehension of the opinion, thus the importance of speaking about those things’.

In conclusion, Rocard warns: « I will not reduce my pressure, upon him, nor upon Sarko, nor upon our poor greenies who are right about most things, except on energy, that is on what is essential.”