Chirac Warned Bush against Overthrowing Saddam

Ambassador Maurice Gourdault-Montagne reveals secrets of Khomeini’s Paris reception

Late former French President Jacques Chirac (R) and former US President George W. Bush. (Getty Images)
Late former French President Jacques Chirac (R) and former US President George W. Bush. (Getty Images)
TT
20

Chirac Warned Bush against Overthrowing Saddam

Late former French President Jacques Chirac (R) and former US President George W. Bush. (Getty Images)
Late former French President Jacques Chirac (R) and former US President George W. Bush. (Getty Images)

French Diplomat Maurice Gourdault-Montagne's memoirs are unlike those of any regular ambassador that fill French libraries year after year.

The author of “The Others Don’t Think Like Us” is no ordinary ambassador. Now retired, his long diplomatic career took him to Tokyo, Beijing, Berlin and London. He was France’s sherpa to the G20 and G7 groups and later was named diplomatic advisor to former French President Jacques Chirac, a post he held for five years between 2002 and 2007.

In short, Gourdault-Montagne held important positions that allowed him to be at the heart of diplomatic and strategic developments, representing France, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. He had a front seat to international political changes, an experience that makes his new book not just a memoir, but a journey inside the comings and goings of international policy.

In 392 pages and 17 chapters, the former diplomat takes the reader behind the scenes of events that shaped the world from the 1970s to the early 21st Century.

The fourth chapter is dedicated to the war on Iraq. It sheds light on the policies of then US President George W. Bush and how Washington dealt with European capitals, most notably Paris.

Gourdault-Montagne recalled Bush’s landmark speech in 2002 during which he spoke of the “Axis of Evil” that includes Iraq. It was apparent that the president was preparing the American public for war that would be aimed at toppling the regime of Saddam Hussein under the pretext that it possessed weapons of mass destruction.

Gourdault-Montagne said then President Chirac “quickly understood the danger of such a policy that would decimate the unity of the western world and regional balances, as well as lead to a confrontation with the Muslim world.”

Moreover, he revealed that Chirac was aware that the ouster of the Saddam regime through a military operation would without a doubt tip the balance in the Muslim world in favor of the Shiites, who are seen as aligned with Iran, at the expense of the Sunnis. This, in turn, would lead to new tensions. Such concerns prompted Chirac to dedicate the second half of 2002 in opposing the US plans.

Condoleezza Rice: Abandoning war in exchange for Saddam’s ouster

Gourdault-Montagne was present at the summit that brought together Chirac and Bush in Prague in November 2002. He wrote: “The two delegations sat face-to-face. The tensions were palpable. Bush stuck to his convictions, and when he spoke, he didn’t even look at Chirac.”

Chirac informed Bush that the “war will destabilize the region and hand over power in Baghdad to the Shiites who are close to Iran. It will also increase Iran’s influence in Syria and in Lebanon (through Hezbollah). The war will not have legal grounds and will create division in the international community, cost the West its credibility and become a source of chaos that will produce a wave of terrorism that will be hard to control.”

Chirac’s warnings fell on deaf ears. Still, he wanted to learn more about Washington’s intentions. In early 2003, he dispatched Gourdault-Montagne to the US capital for talks with then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. He asked her the question of the hour: “What could persuade you to abandon the war? What are your conditions?” Rice replied firmly: “For Saddam to step down.”

The French diplomat then met with then Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. Gourdault-Montagne would describe that meeting as one of the worst moments of his long career. He was made to wait a long time before Wolfowitz received him. The diplomat said his host showed typical American “arrogance”. He too did not listen to France’s concerns and went a step further by being offensive to it and accusing it of “maneuvering”. He added that Washington “knows what you know”, meaning Iraq possesses nuclear weapons while Paris claims ignorance over the matter.

Gourdault-Montagne returned to France with a conviction that the Americans “wanted to be free of military and diplomatic constraints. They did not want to be part of an alliance that follows UN rules and were convinced that they did not need anyone.”

Ultimately, Washington did not heed Chirac’s advice to show patience, so the French president sought to forge an international alliance against the Americans, and turned to Germany and Russia. On Russia, Gourdault-Montagne quoted Chirac as saying: “It is not a doormat on which we can wipe our feet.” Chirac enjoyed the trust and support of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The rest of the story is history: France threatened to resort to its veto power at the Security Council if Washington sought UN approval of its war on Iraq. Many still recall French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin’s famous speech at the council that was met with applause. Undeterred, American forces, backed British forces, invaded Iraq and overthrew the Baghdad regime and Saddam, who was executed.

Despite the deep differences between them, France and the US never severed ties. France was aware that the project of the “new Middle East” envisioned by Washington was doomed to fail. Again, Gourdault-Montagne was dispatched to Washington to meet with Rice with the message that Paris wanted to set aside their dispute and see how it can help in rebuilding Iraq and restoring stability. Rice’s reply, however, was decisive: “We don’t need you. We spent funds and paid the price in the blood of our soldiers.”

The two sides would eventually be able to work together in other areas, most notably in the Lebanese-Syrian file. They helped draft Security Council resolution 1449 that called for the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon. They also cooperated over Iran whereby Paris, along with London and Berlin, kicked off the first negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear program. Washington would later join the talks.

Khomeini, Hezbollah and Lebanon’s stability

Gourdault-Montagne recalled how Saddam had in 1978 sent a letter to his “friend” Chirac, warning him against receiving Iran’s Imam Khomeini, who at the time, was seeking asylum in Iraq. Khomeini was weighing whether to leave Iraq for Paris or Libya’s Tripoli. Saddam asked Chirac to warn then President Giscard d'Estaing against welcoming Khomeini.

Chirac conveyed the message to the president, who did not agree with Saddam’s assessment, but rather believed that it was in France’s interest to keep the deals struck with Iran and maintain cooperation with it. And so, Khomeini was welcomed in France.

Mockingly, Gourdault-Montagne said the only thing that France ever received from Khomeini was the naming of the Tehran street where the French embassy is located after the French town of Neauphle-le-Château where the imam was hosted. “Ever since, the Iranian regime has caused us a headache and our relations with it impacted our policy in the Middle East,” said Gourdault-Montagne.

Political developments in 2003 would push Paris to reconsider resuming communication with Tehran. It was driven by the need to curb Tehran’s ambitions to acquire nuclear weapons and avoid an arms race in the region. It was also seeking to bolster economic cooperation with Iran and persuade it to adopt a positive policy towards Lebanon.

Gourdault-Montagne explained that France’s openness towards Tehran stemmed from its desire to reach a firm regional framework that would provide “peace, stability and prosperity” for all. Lebanon’s stability has always been a fixture in France’s regional policy. It is constantly concerned over Hezbollah’s rising influence in the country and the change in sectarian and demographic balances. Gourdault-Montagne explained that Paris believed that having a “direct channel of communication with Iran was the best way to rein in Hezbollah.”



How Israel Used Spies, Smuggled Drones and AI to Stun and Hobble Iran 

Flames rise from an oil storage facility after it appeared to have been hit by an Israeli strike in Tehran, Iran, early Sunday, June 15, 2025. (AP)
Flames rise from an oil storage facility after it appeared to have been hit by an Israeli strike in Tehran, Iran, early Sunday, June 15, 2025. (AP)
TT
20

How Israel Used Spies, Smuggled Drones and AI to Stun and Hobble Iran 

Flames rise from an oil storage facility after it appeared to have been hit by an Israeli strike in Tehran, Iran, early Sunday, June 15, 2025. (AP)
Flames rise from an oil storage facility after it appeared to have been hit by an Israeli strike in Tehran, Iran, early Sunday, June 15, 2025. (AP)

Israel stunned and hobbled Iran last week when it pulled off an intelligence and military operation years in the making that struck high-level targets with precision.

Guided by spies and artificial intelligence, the Israeli military unleashed a nighttime fusillade of warplanes and armed drones smuggled into Iran to quickly incapacitate many of its air defenses and missile systems. With greater freedom to fly over Iran, Israel bombarded key nuclear sites and killed top generals and scientists. By the time Iran mustered a response hours later, its ability to retaliate — already weakened by past Israeli strikes — was greatly diminished.

This Associated Press account is based on conversations with 10 current and former Israeli intelligence and military officials, some of whom spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss clandestine operations.

It was not possible to independently verify some of their claims. But the former head of research at Israel's spy agency, the Mossad, confirmed the basic contours of the attack, saying she had inside knowledge of how it was planned and executed.

“This attack is the culmination of years of work by the Mossad to target Iran's nuclear program,” said Sima Shine, the former Mossad research director who is now an analyst at the Institute for National Security Studies.

Israel's element of surprise was enhanced by Iranian officials' apparent assumption that Israel wouldn't attack while talks over its rapidly advancing nuclear program were ongoing with the US.

A sixth round of talks had been planned for last Sunday in Oman, but Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu activated “Operation Rising Lion” on Friday after his country first notified President Donald Trump.

Netanyahu has for years said neutralizing Iran's nuclear program was vital for Israel's security, and Israel had previously taken steps to set back Iran's ability to enrich uranium to weapons grade. But Netanyahu said a more aggressive attack proved necessary, as Iran kept advancing its enrichment program despite US diplomatic efforts and warnings from UN watchdogs.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has repeatedly called for Israel's destruction. Iran's political leaders say their nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, though it was the only country without the bomb to enrich uranium close to weapons-grade levels.

Smuggling drones into Iran

The Mossad and the military worked together for at least three years to lay the operational groundwork, according to a former intelligence officer who said he had knowledge of the attack. This person spoke on condition of anonymity given the sensitivity of the subject.

The attack built off knowledge Israel gained during a wave of airstrikes last October, which “highlighted the weakness of Iranian air defenses,” said Naysan Rafati, an Iran analyst at the International Crisis Group.

To further diminish Iranian air defenses and missile systems at the start of last week's attack, Mossad agents had smuggled precision weapons into Iran that were prepositioned to strike from close range, according to two current security officials who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the missions. Those weapons included small, armed drones, which agents snuck into the country in vehicles, according to the former intelligence officer.

Mossad agents stationed weapons close to Iranian surface-to-air missile sites, Shine said. The agency works with a mix of people, both locals and Israelis, she said.

Using AI and human intelligence to select targets

To analyze information it gathered, Israel used the latest artificial-intelligence, or AI, technology, said an intelligence officer involved with selecting individuals and sites to target. He said AI was used to help Israelis quickly sift through troves of data they had obtained.

That effort began last October according to the officer, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media; it was one month before Netanyahu said he had ordered the attack plans.

An investigation by The Associated Press earlier this year uncovered that the Israeli military uses US-made AI models in war to sift through intelligence and intercept communications to learn the movements of its enemies. It's been used in the wars with Hamas in Gaza and with Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The intelligence officer involved in identifying the possible targets said options were first put into various groups, such as leadership, military, civilian and infrastructure. Targets were chosen if they were determined to be a threat to Israel, such as being deeply associated with Iran's Revolutionary Guard, the paramilitary force that controls Iran's ballistic missiles.

The officer was tasked with putting together a list of Iranian generals, including details on where they worked and spent their free time.

Among the high-level military officials killed since Friday's attack were Gen. Hossein Salami, the head of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, and Gen. Mohammed Bagheri, the chief of staff of Iran's armed forces.

In addition to AI, the Mossad relied on spies to identify top nuclear scientists and members of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, according to one security official. At least eight members of the Guard, including the head of its missile program, were killed in a single Israeli strike on an underground bunker.

Targeting Iranian vehicles

Another facet of the attack was to strike Iranian vehicles used to transport and launch missiles.

Shine said the strategy was similar to a Ukrainian operation earlier this month in Russia. In that operation, nearly a third of Moscow's strategic bomber fleet was destroyed or damaged with cheaply made drones snuck into Russian territory, according to Ukrainian officials.

In an interview with Iranian state-run television, the country's police chief, Gen. Ahmadreza Radan, said “several vehicles carrying mini-drones and some tactical drones have been discovered.” He added: “a number of traitors are trying to engage the country's air defense by flying some mini-drones.”

How far back does this go?

The Mossad is believed to have carried out numerous covert attacks on the Iranian nuclear program over the years, including cyberattacks and the killing of Iranian nuclear scientists. But it rarely acknowledges such operations.

In the 2000s, Iranian centrifuges used for enriching uranium were destroyed by the so-called Stuxnet computer virus, believed to be an Israeli and American creation.

In 2018, Israel stole an archive of Iranian nuclear research that included tens of thousands of pages of records, said Yossi Kuperwasser, a retired general and former military intelligence researcher who now directs the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security.

In July 2024, Israel killed a senior leader of Hamas, Ismail Haniyeh, with a bomb in a bedroom of a government guesthouse in Tehran.

Israel's blistering attack last week on the heart of Iran's nuclear and military structure didn't come out of nowhere, said retired Israeli Brig. Gen. Amir Avivi, who heads the Israel Defense and Security Forum think tank.

It was the result of “Israeli intelligence working extensively for years in Iran and establishing a very strong robust presence,” he said.