4 ms·

The argument is about industrial espionnage and French ruthlessness in doing it. There are clear evidence that French neocolonialism has had terrible impacts o

The argument is about industrial espionnage and French ruthlessness in doing it. There are clear evidence that French neocolonialism has had terrible impacts on Sub-Saharan Africa for instance and beyond (The Ivory Coast crisis is a more recent example than the ones you chose). However, they barely indicate anything about an ability to conduct industrial espionnage in, say, the USA. At best, it is adjacent. Bombing the Rainbow Warrior says nothing about the French government's industrial spying capacity as well. It shows how shody the DGSE was in fact.

defrost 4y ago
It clearly demonstrates a ruthlessness in the French Intelligence services through the delibrate bombing of a foreign flagged ship in New ZEaland Government Territory and, by extension, the ruthlessness of the French Government via their arm, those same services.
- PoignardAzur 4y ago
  > It clearly demonstrates a ruthlessness in the French Intelligence services through the delibrate bombing of a foreign flagged ship They bombed the ship in a harbor, in a way that was intended to let everyone evacuate the ship. The photographer died because he came back to the hull to get his belongings when the second bomb exploded. (Which isn't to say it was an accident. The agents did plant those bombs, and the bombs did kill someone in a way they could have anticipated, even if it wasn't their goal.) It's a radical action to take for an intelligence service, and it's a deadly crime committed on the sovereign territory of an allied country, but I don't think it's fair to assess that it demonstrates "ruthlessness of the French Government". It's certainly pretty mild by the standards of international espionage. And it seems like very weak evidence if used to argue that France has uniquely aggressive secret services. I don't want to do whataboutism to excuse the DGSE's actions, but if the argument is that the DGSE is less bound by ethics than, say, the CIA, then I do have to point out that the CIA has done a lot worse than bombing a boat, a lot more recently.

defrost 4y ago

It clearly demonstrates a ruthlessness in the French Intelligence services through the delibrate bombing of a foreign flagged ship in New ZEaland Government Territory and, by extension, the ruthlessness of the French Government via their arm, those same services.

PoignardAzur 4y ago
> It clearly demonstrates a ruthlessness in the French Intelligence services through the delibrate bombing of a foreign flagged ship They bombed the ship in a harbor, in a way that was intended to let everyone evacuate the ship. The photographer died because he came back to the hull to get his belongings when the second bomb exploded. (Which isn't to say it was an accident. The agents did plant those bombs, and the bombs did kill someone in a way they could have anticipated, even if it wasn't their goal.) It's a radical action to take for an intelligence service, and it's a deadly crime committed on the sovereign territory of an allied country, but I don't think it's fair to assess that it demonstrates "ruthlessness of the French Government". It's certainly pretty mild by the standards of international espionage. And it seems like very weak evidence if used to argue that France has uniquely aggressive secret services. I don't want to do whataboutism to excuse the DGSE's actions, but if the argument is that the DGSE is less bound by ethics than, say, the CIA, then I do have to point out that the CIA has done a lot worse than bombing a boat, a lot more recently.