Talk:Jacques Chirac/Archive 1

Communism to Gaullism
I don't really see how "Ironically" should have be deleted for NPOV. My dictionary says that something is ironic when "characterized by often poignant difference or incongruity between what is expected and what actually is"; there is certainly and objectively some incongruity in being suspected of being a crypto-Communist and becoming one of the best known right-wing politicians of one's country!

I do however understand that some even impersonal tone should be preferable. David.Monniaux 16:37, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I agree but we generally avoid this kind of style. This is also not so incongruitous for those who know something about this era. It's not improbable that Chirac was an oponent to the Algerian War. (It seems he had very good relations with Michel Rocard.) The evolution of Chirac is not that uncommon they were many left-wing (or radical-socialists like Chaban-Delmas) gaullists. There is a real hate between Le Pen and Chirac and I think the sources can be traced to that era. Ericd 16:51, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Chirac was pro French Algeria as late as 1960 (when his ENA promotion was in Algeria for administrative reinforcement). Most of his colleagues were already favorable to independence. But he seems to have evolved during his stay and to have reluctantly accepted the unavoidability of the Algerian independence. I think I saw this in an interview of Bernard Stasi which was with him at the time. If it is deemed really important for the article, I guess I can find the article in question and quote it more accurately Octave Octet 02:07, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Chirac was given back his rank of major by an intervention of General Koenig. Koenig was minister of Mendès-France governement. Some collaborators of Mendès-France have worked later with Chaban-Delmas (Jacques Delors and Michel Jobert for instance) and were later ministers of François Mitterrand. It seems well that Chirac was a left-wing gaullist that turned conservative. Ericd 17:03, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Well, it's not as though Chirac had never changed his economics views. After all, he has been successively Communist, dirigist, laissez-faire liberal, reducer of the social fracture... Still, I suspect that most non-French readers will be a bit surprised. David.Monniaux 17:20, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I agree but this isn't more suprising that the fact that Delors was a important collaborator of a gaullist Prime Minister. In fact, Gaullism became really a conservatism after 1968. Ericd 17:56, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Have you read Gaullism? David.Monniaux 18:00, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I've worked a lot on Charles de Gaulle and it somewhat changed my vision of the character. I've read it quickly just now Gaullism. I think it can be improved. I think we should point the fact that the gaullism is born of 2 (and maybe 3) fractures in the French society that were stronger than the left/right opposition : - the german occupation, - the Algerian war and the Algerian independance. It's a fact that de Gaulle gain support from a lot of left-wing people at various time but few remained long-term supporters. Ericd 18:11, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Yes, but you should definitely underline the fact that after de Gaulle's death, the name "Gaullist" has been taken by Chirac's RPR, and that the RPR is no longer Gaullist in the original sense anyway. David.Monniaux 18:24, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

The RPR is dead now it's the UMP ! Obviously the UMP isn't gaullist at all. Chirac -it's another question- IMO he's more gaullist now that he was in the 30 previous years ;-) Ericd 18:33, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Photo with Saddam Hussein
I remove the photo of Chirac with Saddam here's the reason why http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/ Ericd 10:13, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Er, that page doesn't explain at all why you removed the image. It just gives info on the Reagan administration's dealings with Iraq. (If you think that using the photo unfairly maligns Chirac, be informed that we also have the Rumsfeld/Saddam picture on Wikipedia). Could you be more specific? Andrewlevine 08:02, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Emphasizing on Chirac or the Reagan administration has no interest the US and all the European countries bring support to Saddam during the Iran/Iraq war. And this photo is taken in Paris in 1976 when Saddam was only vice-president, what does it mean ? If we have a photo of Chirac whith Mister Smith should we add the photo to the article because Chirac is on the photo ? Ericd 08:17, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC


 * seconded. SweetLittleFluffyThing


 * I can't quite parse your first sentence, but I understand what you mean and I agree on it. While Chirac's official dealings with Saddam Hussein are a fact, so are those of many leaders of the Western World. These should be recalled on a page dealing with Saddam Hussein, to which we could link. I think that the corruption scandals are probably far more important in defining Chirac's perception in the French public than the dealings with Iraq, for instance.David.Monniaux 21:05, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Sorry, my contribution to the criticism of French opposition to the Iraq war because of alleged financial interests is not fully neutral. Feel free to change it but keep the content. Get-back-world-respect 23:17, 9 May 2004 (UTC)


 * This section is far too long. We should keep things in balance. I'm pretty sure that if you ask the man on the street in France, Iraq is only a distant concern. Far more pressing are issues like taxes and social security reform. Focusing on Iraq seems, to me, somewhat Americanocentrist (or, equivalently, seems to reflect an obsession about US foreign policy). David.Monniaux 08:03, 10 May 2004 (UTC)


 * I am ok if the alleged French financial interests in Iraq are not mentioned. I am not ok if they are mentioned without comment about what the other side says. Get-back-world-respect 01:03, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

I think the addition of a picture of Chirac with Saddam Hussein is hardly NPOV. As the dispute between France and the US over Iraq is over can we remove it? As it stands this article is embarassing and does a disservice to Wikipedia. Secretlondon 01:24, 25 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Donald Rumsfeld's page also has a photograph of him shaking hands with Saddam Hussein. David.Monniaux 06:16, 25 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not suppose to balance one article with another, but to be neutral in every single article. So let's remove both pictures. Mentioning Chirac's former links with Saddam in the "Political contention with the United States" section is sufficient. Thbz 09:38, 28 May 2004 (UTC)


 * You're right. Whatever the attention that Chirac's past dealings with Iraq get in the American media, they represent only a small part of his career. Possibly, a page on dealings of Western powers with Saddam Hussein could be written. David.Monniaux 11:47, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

I replaced the Saddam pic with a pic of Chirac replacing Pierre Messmer as prime minister (an appropriate one). I also found a more recent portrait pic. This article still needs a lot of work, though. The two pics below can be added once this article is expanded. 172 14:37, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

I have heard in more than one place that Chirac was so close with Iraqi affairs in the 1970s that he was referred to as "Jacques Iraq" as a joke. If true, that should be included. A2Kafir 03:28, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * It was not a common occurence in the French press, as far as I know. Perhaps in the Israeli or Iraqi press? On the other hand, should we list, for each major politician, all the nicknames given by all the newspapers of the world? David.Monniaux 07:35, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I think that there's a problem here. The thing is, to illustrate Chirac's actions in 2002 with respect to Saddam Hussein's Iraq, is it appropriate to use a 1976 photograph? Should we put a similar photograph on the page of every Western politician who ever had high-level contacts with Hussein or with other dictators? David.Monniaux 18:41, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)





Second term as President
The writer mentions at the end of the section that "the Sun" newspaper made a tasteless comparison between Chirac and some other leader (I am guessing Tony Blair). Anyway without more, this sentence is a little disjointed. I recommend either a description of the comparison, a jump cite to the article, or removing the sentence entirely.Ramsquire 21:05, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * The Sun published a special edition where the front page compared Chirac to a worm. This was in a series of attacks from this ever francophobic tabloid. I'm unsure we have to spell this out. David.Monniaux 02:42, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure either, that's why I had the option of just taking it out. I'm not sure if it was necessary to have a negative comment from what you called a francophobic newspaper about the President of France. It's just as as I read the sentence, I kept thinking, "What did the Sun do?" which I feel may lead people away from the point of the article. Either way it's not a big deal, just a thought I had.19:58, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Superliar
Isn't Chirac's nickname in France Superliar? Hardly the basis for good open Government!


 * Superliar was a character coined by Les Guignols de l'Info. David.Monniaux 20:01, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Young rebel
I like this photograph! David.Monniaux 15:27, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)
 * A young rebel ;-)
 * Ericd 17:08, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I'm tempted to ask the Elysée whether we can use it. :-) David.Monniaux 17:20, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)
 * Yes please ask and if they say no ask directly to Chirac !
 * Ericd 18:33, 21 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Official photo
Shouldn't we get rid of this photo? Isn't it copyrighted by photographer Bettina Rheims? David.Monniaux 07:50, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC) Use of fair use pictures is fine. During a discussion about the fair use status of Image:TrangBang.jpg, Jimbo stated the foundation's official stance on fair use, and the image was not deleted. See also this meta page. 172 15:41, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

My problem was that this is a photograph by a well-known photographer, who perhaps gains something from its reproduction. Fair use is more efficiently pleaded when the copyright holder has no financial incentive in the matter. David.Monniaux 16:22, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Well, the comparison with TrangBang is probably not a good one for the opinion you support: we finally got a complaint from the Associated Press about this photo (and the photo of the raising of the flag on Iwo Jima); finally, we settled and they gave us a special license for Wikipedia... David.Monniaux 07:04, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Party
Is Jacques Chirac actually a member of UMP? I thought that presidents of the Republic were supposed not to be members of a party? (Even though they obviously have a very strong link to some party.) David.Monniaux 07:04, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

De Gaulle intended the President to be independent from political parties. But this independence is to be taken in a broad sense, which does not mean that the president cannot (or should not) be member of a party. Nowadays, things changed a lot, and the President is more and more dependent of the majority party. So yes, JC is member of the UMP. Peco 06:21, 10 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Not really. You have merely pointed out the obvious: that is, Chirac has very close ties to the UMP. :-) But is he actually a card-carrying member? David.Monniaux 16:57, 10 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Chirac founded the RPR, so surely he was a member of that, at least? john k 19:10, 10 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm wondering whether he quit when he became president of the Republic. See, I don't quite see Chirac belonging to UMP now, with his "friend" Nicolas Sarkozy being president of the party. David.Monniaux 19:39, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I see your point. However, lemme make two points. First, The article doesn't clearly state is a card-holding member, it just says it's his party, which is not precise. Second, membership is not only about holding a card, esp. when you are a very special member. To close the debate, I'll try to obtain official information from the UMP. Peco 19:59, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Unofficial info from a member of the UMP I got : JC is not a member of the UMP (because of the constitution art. 5), but his wife is a member, Corrèze federation. However, IMHO, the fact that his party is the UMP should stay in the article.Peco 06:43, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
 * That's what I think too. David.Monniaux 10:19, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

May 16th or 17th ?
I've changed the start date of Chirac's presidency from May 16 to May 17, 1995, matching the caption in photo of his inauguration, as well as the May 17 page. If it's indeed May 16, please change it back. Thanks. -- PFHLai 20:42, 2005 May 10 (UTC)

Love child in Japan
Everybody in Paris says he has a son in Japan, who is now 19, and that's why he goes so often to Japan. Her mother is the vice-president of one of the best-known and most influential Western art galleries in Japan. She is also director of a gallery in Paris, with a base in the 8th arrondissement, a stone's throw from the Elysée Palace. She was made a Chevalier des Arts et Lettres when Jacques Chirac was François Mitterrand's prime minister (1986 to 1988). She is the mother of three daughters. She is no longer his mistress.


 * This story also circulates in the French expat circles in Japan. Unfortunately, to this day, nobody has confirmed this story. Until some kind of reputable source steps in, this is not encyclopedic content. David.Monniaux 05:08, 25 May 2005 (UTC)


 * One source is the book Nos délits d'initiés : Mes soupçons de citoyen by Guy Birenbaum. Collection : Folio documents - Format : Poche - 329 pages - ISBN 2070315185
 * A book speeking about a rumor doesn't make the rumor encyclopedic. So far, it has no impact on french politics, thus it's not interesting. (!= Ms Lewinsky). Peco
 * Where does this book take its information from? David.Monniaux 20:42, 25 May 2005 (UTC)


 * So why are there so many entries about the alleged children of Albert II (both of them, the belgian one and the Monaco one ?): Delphine Boël, Alexandre Coste, Jazmin Grace Grimaldi, etc

Assessment comment
Substituted at 15:03, 1 May 2016 (UTC)