This article titled “Russia refuses more Syria sanctions” was written by Ian Black, for The Guardian on Monday 12th September 2011 19.44 UTC

Russia has rebuffed western attempts to increase the pressure on the Syrian regime, led by Bashar al-Assad, as new United Nations figures show at least 2,600 people have been killed since anti-government protests erupted in March.

President Dmitry Medvedev said after talks with David Cameron that additional pressure was “absolutely not needed” because existing UN and European Union sanctions were squeezing the regime.

Britain, the US and France have been pushing for tougher action by the UN but have met opposition from Russia and China, veto-wielding permanent members of the security council, and others.

The latest UN casualty figures – 400 more than previously given – were announced on Monday by the UN high commissioner for human rights, Navi Pillay, who called the situation “dire” and again complained that Syria had refused access for a UN humanitarian assessment team.

Syria has banned almost all journalists from entering the country but new images have emerged of killings, injuries and funerals of victims.

One clip, [WARNING: Contains explicit images] posted by the Local Co-ordination Committees, appeared to show the final moments of a 14-year-old boy, Izzat al-Babidi, reportedly shot in the head during a demonstration in the Damascus suburb of Douma on Monday morning.

Other pictures showed hundreds of people attending the funeral of another boy, Subhi Salam, who was fatally wounded by a sniper during protests last Friday.

Pillay’s figure of 2,600 dead was immediately contradicted by a senior aide to Assad, Bouthaina Shaaban. “There are 700 casualties among the army and the police, and 700 among the rebels,” she said in Moscow. “We have a list [of the victims' names], and we can provide it.”

Shaaban’s visit was part of an attempt by Syria to stave off any danger that its Russian ally would abandon it. Medvedev appeared to show that he would stand firm, calling for a “well-balanced position between both parties to the conflict, the Syrian government and the rebels”. This was a far cry from the now firm western position that Assad has lost all legitimacy. Russia’s support brought a call from Syrian opposition activists for a “day of anger”.

Al-Arabiya TV quoted opposition sources as claiming that Syrian military aircraft had been flying low over the central city of Homs, where many have died in recent weeks. Syrian activists describe fighting in the nearby Rastan area between army defectors and loyalists, and an incipient “low-intensity civil war”, with Islamists smuggling in weapons from abroad.

The Saudi-owned channel also reported three clergymen from the Assad family’s Alawite sect in Homs as distancing themselves from the “atrocities” carried out by the regime. This week, opposition figures plan to unveil the final makeup of the Syrian National Council, a broad coalition of different anti-Assad groups.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

This article titled “Maid’s lawyer tells New York district attorney to quit Strauss-Kahn case” was written by Ed Pilkington in New York, for The Guardian on Thursday 7th July 2011 00.31 UTC

Relations between the maid in the Dominique Strauss-Kahn case and the New York district attorney’s office appear to have irreparably broken down after her lawyers accused the office of leaking damaging information about her.

Kenneth Thompson, representing the unidentified alleged victim of a sexual assault by the former IMF head, is calling for Cyrus Vance to quit the case. In a letter addressed to the chief prosecutor, Thompson wrote: “District Attorney Vance, we ask in earnest that your office voluntarily recuse itself from the Strauss-Kahn case and that you appoint a special prosecutor.”

The extraordinary request is an indication of the dire state of the prosecution case. Vance has stated there were “major holes” in the maid’s account of events at the Sofitel hotel in Manhattan where the alleged attack took place. Strauss-Kahn’s legal team met lawyers from the office on Wednesday to discuss how to resolve the case.

Hours before Vance made his declaration to the Manhattan court last week, a story ran in the New York Times detailing problems with the maid’s testimony. Thompson accused Daniel Alonso, a senior member of Vance’s team, of having planted the leak with the newspaper. In his letter, obtained by Reuters, Thompson said quotes given in the Times article were almost identical to language used by Alonso to Thompson at around the same time.

In the article, it was revealed that the maid had telephoned her boyfriend, who is held in an prison in Arizona on drugs charges. The Times said that in the conversation, recorded by police, she said words to the effect of “Don’t worry, this guy has a lot of money. I know what I am doing.”

Thompson said “virtually the same words” had been used by Alonso to him just hours earlier.

Thompson went on in his letter to complain that the office had failed to categorically deny a story in the New York Post alleging that the maid has been a prostitute. “Such apparent leaks by members of your office is, without question, an abrogation of the duties and responsibilities of the prosecutor.”

Vance is caught in a case that could define the success or failure of his term as chief prosecutor in the city. On the one hand he is obliged to share serious doubts about the alleged victim with the courts and with the defence; on the other hand he cannot be seen to be discriminating against a poor apparently defenceless woman in favour of a very rich and powerful man.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

The content previously published here has been withdrawn. We apologise for any inconvenience.

This article titled “Apache helicopters to be sent into Libya by Britain” was written by Richard Norton-Taylor, for The Guardian on Monday 23rd May 2011 17.16 UTC

Britain and France are to deploy attack helicopters against Libya in an attempt to break the military stalemate, particularly in the important coastal city of Misrata, security sources have told the Guardian.

In a significant escalation of the conflict, the Apaches – based on HMS Ocean – will join French helicopters in risky operations which reflect deepening frustration among British and French defence chiefs about their continuing inability to protect civilians in Libya.

Apaches, which are being used in counter-insurgency operations in Afghanistan, can manoeuvre and attack small targets in relatively built-up areas. Heavily armed Apaches and French Tiger helicopters are equipped with night vision equipment and electronic guidance systems. Forces loyal to the Libyan leader, Muammar Gaddafi, have shed their uniforms, are using civilian vehicles and hiding armour near civilian buildings, including hospitals and schools.

The decision to deploy the helicopters is a clear recognition that high-level bombing from 15,000 feet cannot protect civilians who continue to be attacked by rocket and mortar shells. It brings the Nato offensive much closer to the ground at a time when Britain and other Nato countries are insisting they have no intention of sending in troops.

However, the helicopters could be vulnerable to handheld rocket-propelled grenades and even rifle fire.

Hospital officials said two people were killed and several wounded during Monday’s fighting in Misrata. Later, heavy explosions outside the city were heard, lasting about an hour.

Reuters quoted a rebel spokesman as saying that forces loyal to Gaddafi also shelled the rebel-held town of Zintan and moved troops close to the mountainous region bordering Tunisia, intensifying operations on the war’s western front.

On Monday Nato warplanes bombed Tripoli in what appeared to be the heaviest night of bombing since the start of the air campaign against Gaddafi’s forces and his sprawling compound. More than 20 airstrikes in less than half an hour set off thunderous booms that rattled windows around the city.

Britain and France clearly hope that the use of attack helicopters, and the fact of revealing the intention to use them, will deter pro-Gaddafi forces and assuage Libyan rebels who have been demanding more effective military action from Nato countries. The sight of Nato forces actually on the ground would be strongly opposed by most countries in the alliance, including the US and also those Arab countries in favour of the air campaign against Gaddafi’s forces.

The foreign secretary, William Hague, attending an EU ministerial meeting in Brussels, said: “We are very much behind the intensification of the military campaign and … so is France.” He added: “We certainly agree with France, and indeed with all our partners, including all our partners at the EU meeting here today, that it is necessary to intensify the military, economic and diplomatic pressure on the Gaddafi regime.”

Alain Juppé, France’s foreign minister, confirmed that Paris has dispatched a dozen helicopters to add greater strike force to the campaign against Gaddafi in Libya. He said that the 12 Tiger and Gazelle helicopters sent from Toulon on 17 May would enable “us to better adapt our ground attack capacity with more precise means of striking”.

He added: “Our strategy is to step up the military pressure in the weeks ahead while pushing at the same time for a political solution.” According to French sources, the battleship Tonnerre, carrying the helicopters, left Toulon last week. The vessel combines the roles of helicopter carrier, hospital ship, and troops transporter.

Juppé said the helicopters would not be used to deploy ground forces in Libya and that the decision to send them was fully in line with the UN security council resolution mandating attacks in Libya.

The French newspaper Le Figaro said the helicopters would be assisted by target identification from French special forces who have been on the ground in Libya since the start of the allied operation there. The Ministry of Defence does not comment on special forces’ operations.

Jim Murphy, the shadow defence secretary, said: “This is a significant development. It is right that the alliance is intensifying military pressure on Gaddafi’s forces, but the British government needs to be clearer about a political strategy for Libya and whether the military commitment to Libya is an open-ended one.”

The first international stabilisation response team has arrived in Libya, the international development secretary Andrew Mitchell has confirmed . He said Britain would continue to provide medical and emergency food supplies, adding that “the international community also needs to start thinking strategically about what is needed now to help lay the foundations for a stable, secure Libya”.

• This article was updated on 23 May 2011, to add greater detail.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

The content previously published here has been withdrawn. We apologise for any inconvenience.

This article titled “Osama bin Laden death leads to war of words between Pakistan and west” was written by Declan Walsh in Abbottabad, for The Guardian on Wednesday 4th May 2011 22.00 UTC

Pakistan’s prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, lashed out at western critics as the war of words over the death of Osama bin Laden intensified, further undermining trust between Pakistan and the US.

The fact that bin Laden could live so long in Pakistan was “an intelligence failure of the whole world, not just Pakistan alone”, Gilani said in Paris before meeting President Sarkozy. Washington was also to blame for the lapses, he added.

It was the latest of several toughly-worded statements from Pakistani officials seeking to fend off angry western criticism of its failure to apprehend Bin Laden before a team of US Navy Seals swooped on a house in Abbottabad, 35 miles north of Islamabad, on Sunday night.

In perhaps the most damaging allegation, CIA chief Leon Panetta said Pakistani officials were kept in the dark about the Bin Laden assault over fears he would be tipped off. “It was decided that any effort to work with the Pakistanis could jeopardise the mission. They might alert the targets,” he told Time.

In recent days President Asif Ali Zardari, several ambassadors and the foreign ministry have staunchly defended their country’s reputation. American claims of complicity with Bin Laden were “baseless speculation”, Zardari said.

But Pakistani officials are still struggling to explain how the Saudi fugitive managed to live in Abbottabad, a garrison town with thousands of soldiers and a major military academy, for up to six years. President Obama’s counter-terrorism adviser, John Brennan, said some Pakistani officials, “including within the official Pakistani establishment”, knew about his hideout.

France’s foreign minister Alain Juppé said it was “hard to believe that the presence of a person such as Bin Laden in a large compound in a relatively small town … could go completely unnoticed.”

Pakistan’s military has been largely quiet, although officials from the ISI spy agency have released some details about the raid based on interviews with Bin Laden relatives left behind by the US Navy Seal team.

Pakistan’s role is also coming under intense fire in the US congress. Senator Frank Lautenberg, a Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee that apportions government spending, said on Monday: “The United States provides billions of dollars in aid to Pakistan. Before we send another dime, we need to know whether Pakistan truly stands with us in the fight against terrorism.”

But western officials also recognise that Pakistan will remain a crucial partner in the war against Islamist militancy due to the war in Afghanistan, and because many of the most potent jihadi outfits, including al-Qaida, are based on Pakistani soil.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

This article titled “French riot police in uproar over lunchtime booze ban” was written by Angelique Chrisafis in Paris, for The Guardian on Thursday 21st April 2011 19.16 UTC

They might be lampooned as a bunch of truncheon-happy meatheads by leftwing street demonstrators, but that doesn’t mean French riot police don’t appreciate a nice glass of Burgundy with their lunch.

The notorious Compagnies Républicaines de Sécurité, or CRS, are outraged at an official decree stating they can no longer drink wine or beer with their meals.

Until now, a civilised tipple was part of the daily lunch menu of the controversial force, lauded by Nicolas Sarkozy, whose trademark black body armour and riot shields are a regular feature on French streets.

A glass of wine, beer or cider – but not spirits – was always permitted with lunch, including while on duty. Even packed lunches provided out of riot vans while they were patrolling demonstrations came with a can of beer or glass of wine.

But in October last year, authorities were annoyed when pictures published on the website Bakchich showed uniformed riot police swigging beer from cans on the sidelines of a sixth-formers’ street-protest against pension reforms in Perreux-sur-Marne, north of Paris. The website reported that having told locals it was too dangerous to go outside during the high-school demo, uniformed officers stopped for a beer on a street corner in full view of the public.

Police unions expressed their fury at the new decree. Paul Le Guennec, of the biggest riot police union, Unité Police SGP-FO, said the French public had not seemed shocked at the notion of a CRS officer drinking at lunch.

“Does the fact that having a glass of wine while eating prevent any kind of worker from carrying out their job? I don’t think the chief of police drinks water when he’s having a meal,” Le Guennec told the paper Le JDD.

The union argued that the CRS did not have a higher incidence of alcohol problems than the rest of society, saying a small drink with lunch was in line with French labour law.

But unions warned that the row over lunchtime drinking should not be allowed to detract from their protests over cuts to the 14,000-strong force. Earlier this year, there was unprecedented strike action and protests by riot police over cuts to barracks and staff, with some CRS in Marseille going on hunger strike in an embarrassment to the security-minded Sarkozy.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

This article titled “Nato lacking strike aircraft for Libya campaign” was written by Ian Traynor in Brussels and Richard Norton-Taylor, for The Guardian on Tuesday 5th April 2011 15.49 UTC

Nato is running short of attack aircraft for its bombing campaign against Muammar Gaddafi only days after taking command of the Libyan mission from a coalition led by the US, France and Britain.

David Cameron has pledged four more British Tornado jets on top of eight already being used for the air strikes. But pressure is growing for other European countries, especially France, to offer more after the Americans withdrew their attack aircraft from the campaign on Monday.

“We will need more strike capability,” a Nato official said.

Since the French launched the first raids on Libya 16 days ago, the coalition and Nato have destroyed around 30% of Gaddafi’s military capacity, Lieutenant General Charles Bouchard, the Canadian officer leading the air campaign, told Nato ambassadors.

But attempts to “degrade” the Libyan leader’s firepower further were being complicated by a shift in tactics by Gaddafi, said Brigadier General Marc van Uhm, a senior Nato military planner.

“They are using light vehicles and trucks to transport,” while hiding tanks and heavy weapons, he said.

“We try to identify where those heavy assets are, because we have seen they have chosen to hide themselves into urban areas to prevent being targeted, even using human shields.”

Nato officials insisted the pace of the air operations was being maintained. But it has emerged that the US and the French, who have been the two biggest military players until now, are retaining national control over substantial military forces in the Mediterranean and refusing to submit them to Nato authority.

The French have the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier, two escorting frigates and 16 fighter aircraft, none of which are under the Nato command and control which was announced last Thursday.

Until last week, President Nicolas Sarkozy was the loudest opponent of handing over the operations to Nato control. Nonetheless, the French are not only taking part in the Nato campaign, but are the biggest non-US contributors, with 33 aircraft, double Britain’s 17. Not all of these are strike aircraft.

Until Monday, the Americans had performed most of the attacks on ground targets, with the French executing around a quarter and the British around a 10th. Given the US retreat, Nato is seeking to fill the gap, but only the British have pledged more.

“We’re very happy that one country decided to bring in more assets,” said Van Uhm.

When Nato took over from the coalition it was stressed that it had assumed “sole command and control” of all air operations.

However, countries are dipping in and out of Nato command, withdrawing “air assets” for national operations before returning them to alliance control.

“It’s pretty clear that Nato is in command. Nato is in the lead,” said Van Uhm. “There are assets under national control in the area. But General Bouchard is commanding what Nato does … You could say nothing is happening without Nato knowing.”

The general stressed that no air strikes on ground targets in Libya had taken place outside Nato’s command.

Six countries are believed to be engaged in the bombing campaign – France, Britain, Canada, Denmark, Belgium, and Norway – with many others involved in policing an arms embargo and enforcing a no-fly zone.

Gaddafi’s air force had been grounded, Van Uhm said.

In London, the Ministry of Defence said RAF aircraft had struck targets in Libya on each of the past three days.

Tornado GR4 ground attack planes, flying from the Italian airbase of Gioia del Colle, hit a battle tank and two surface-to-air missile launchers near Sirte on Monday when they launched three anti-armour Brimstone missiles. The previous day, they dropped Paveway IV bombs and fired Brimstone missiles to target a group of 10 armoured vehicles south of Sirte.

On Saturday, they dropped Paveway IV bombs on two tanks in Sirte and also hit “several small ground attack aircraft” on an airfield near Misrata, the MoD said.

Two of the 10 Eurofighter/Typhoons based in Italy have returned to the UK. The Typhoons are not equipped to conduct ground attack operations.

• This article was amended on 7 April 2011. The original referred to firing Paveway IV bombs and missiles. These have both been corrected.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

This article titled “Nato to take control in Libya after US, UK and France reach agreement” was written by Nicholas Watt, Nick Hopkins and Ian Traynor in Brussels, for The Guardian on Wednesday 23rd March 2011 01.42 UTC

Britain, France and the US have agreed that Nato will take over the military command of the no-fly zone over Libya in a move that represents a setback for Nicolas Sarkozy, who had hoped to diminish the role of the alliance.

Barack Obama agreed in separate phone calls with Sarkozy and David Cameron that political oversight would be handed to a separate body made up of members of the coalition, including Arab countries such as Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, which are outside Nato.

The agreement, which will have to be put be to all 28 members of Nato, indicates the alliance is on course to resolve one of its most serious disagreements. The alliance had been starting to splinter as it tried to comply with Obama’s demand that Washington be quickly relieved of command of the air campaign.

The Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi criticised the air strikes which he said breached the UN charter and were “by a bunch of fascists”. In a televised address he promised victory over the coalition: “In the short term, we’ll beat them, in the long term, we’ll beat them.”

Sarkozy moved to portray the agreement as a Franco-American success. In a statement, the Élysée Palace said: “The two presidents have come to an agreement on the way to use the command structures of Nato to support the coalition.” But the agreement represents a blow for Sarkozy, who had tried to persuade Britain to set up an Anglo-French command for all military operations in Libya. That idea was strongly resisted by Britain which said Nato was best placed to run the military operations.

Obama, who spoke to Cameron and Sarkozy in separate phone calls during his tour of Latin America, agreed that:

• Nato will assume the day-to-day military command of the no-fly zone, using the alliance’s military structures. The operation could be run by Admiral James Stavridis, the US supreme allied commander in Europe, who works from the Nato’s military headquarters in Mons, Belgium.

• Political oversight will be provided by members of the coalition and not by Nato. Sarkozy will say this shows Nato is not in complete command, as it was in the bombing campaign against Serbian targets during the 1999 Kosovo campaign. In a traditional Nato-led operation, political control would be provided by the North Atlantic Council, the main political decision-making body of the alliance.

The plan will be put to the council on Wednesday, which will hold its third meeting in as many days at ambassadorial level. All 28 members of Nato will have to agree on the proposal. Downing Street adopted a more cautious approach than the Élysée when it confirmed that Cameron and Obama had agreed that Nato should play a key role. A spokesman said: “The prime minister and the president agreed that good progress had been made in Nato on command and control of military operations, that Nato should play a key role in the command structure going forward, and that these arrangements now needed to be finalised.”

Diplomatic sources said progress on the new structures emerged as France and Turkey started to give ground. France softened its stance after Britain and the US agreed that the international coalition would have political oversight but that Nato would have to assume military control. London and Washington were supported by newer members of Nato, such as Romania and the Czech Republic, who said they could only support the campaign if it was run by Nato.

A phone call between Obama and the Turkish prime minister Tayyip Recep Erdogan led to what was described as a more pragmatic approach. “Turkey has become more flexible in the last day or so,” one diplomat said. Turkey, the third largest member of Nato, and which has a predominantly Muslim population, had highlighted tensions within the alliance when it launched a strong attack on France. Sarkozy had tried to reach out to the Muslim world by playing down Nato’s role in Libya.

Egemen Bagis, Turkey’s Europe minister, accused the French president of exploiting Libya for his own electoral needs. Sarkozy has been the biggest opponent of Ankara’s ambitions to join the European Union. “A European leader began his election campaign by organising a meeting that led to a process of air strikes against Libya. He acted before a Nato decision, and his act was based on his subjective evaluation of a UN resolution,” said Bagis.

The agreement came as William Hague, the foreign secretary, declared that the Arab spring is likely to be more significant than 9/11. Hague told the Times CEO Summit Africa: “We are only in the early stages of what is happening in north Africa and the Middle East. It is already set to overtake the 2008 financial crisis and 9/11 as the most important development of the early 21st century, and is likely to bring some degree of political change in all countries in the Arab world.”"This is a historic shift of massive importance, presenting the international community as a whole with an immense opportunity. We believe that the international response to these events must be commensurately generous, bold and ambitious.”

The foreign secretary added that the international action against Libya – and the demands for freedom – meant that Robert Mugabe and other authoritarian leaders in Africa would eventually face justice. Hague said: “Governments that use violence to stop democratic development will not earn themselves respite forever. They will pay an increasingly high price for actions which they can no longer hide from the world with ease, and will find themselves on the wrong side of history. Governments that block the aspirations of their people, that steal or are corrupt, that oppress and torture or that deny freedom of expression and human rights should bear in mind that they will find it increasingly hard to escape the judgment of their own people, or where warranted, the reach of international law. The action we have taken in Libya, authorised by the United Nations Security Council, shows that the international community does take gross violations of human rights extremely seriously.”

The agreement on the military command of the no-fly zone came as key military British figures expressed dismay at No 10′s handling of the conflict, suggesting the prime minister’s office is subverting commanders conducting the operation. Officials resent the way No 10 appeared to undermine General Sir David Richards, the country’s most senior military officer, who rejected ministers’ claims that Gaddafi might be a legitimate target. Sources said that by identifying Gaddafi as a target, Britain laid itself open to the charge that “if you kill him, it was premeditated, and if you don’t, you have failed”.

Additional reporting by Richard Norton-Taylor and Simon Tisdall

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.

This article titled “Image of France as a generous welfare state marred by grim reality” was written by Phillip Inman Economics correspondent, in Paris, for The Guardian on Monday 21st March 2011 17.46 UTC

Thousands will pour into the Galeries Lafayette this week to enjoy the last few days of the spring sales and beat the recession. Tourists and Parisians will find huge discounts on designer clothes on every floor of the ornately domed department store that dominates Boulevard Haussman, Paris’s main shopping street.

As a measure of confidence, the sales present a gloomy picture of France’s middle classes and their appetite for shopping. Marc Jacobs, Chloé and Lacoste offer 30% discounts. Givenchy dresses are knocked down by 40% and the Galleries’ own ranges can be bought for 50% less than the list price. Only Prada, Dior and a handful of international brands hold their value .

Like their British counterparts, French shoppers can only be enticed with massive bargains. Technically, France like Britain, has escaped recession. But to ordinary French workers, blue and white collar, the pain of the last two years lingers. Shopping is expensive even in the sales, especially when a mix of high taxes and punishing national insurance leaves you with one of the lowest rates of take home pay of any western country. Only Belgium and Hungary exceed its average 45% tax on pay.

France appears to have a natural order still in place with food and wine at its heart and a generous welfare state to support the sick, the elderly and those out of work. Yet this picture disguises a slow decline, made worse by the financial crisis, that leaves the average French family struggling to make ends meet.

Loïc Sadoulet, a professor of economics at the Paris-based business school Insead, says the word that sums up France is disconnect. By which he means the rosy image and the dour reality are miles apart.

A trip on the Paris Metro makes the point. It was always dowdy, if not a little shabby, which most residents and visitors accepted as part of its charm. Now there are major stations closed for refurbishment and some passageways are reminiscent of ancient caves with green slime and blown plaster adding to the effect. The construction at one station of glass screens to prevent passengers falling on the tracks can only be described as makeshift, with bits of wood screwed to the platform floor to hold the metal posts in place.

Paris train workers joined the protests against pension reforms last October and closed the city for several days after similar shutdowns in 2007, 2005 and 2003, over government plans to cut pensions and welfare.

An apocryphal story about France’s slide from greatness goes back to the decision in 2005 on where to hold the 2012 Olympics. It is said the top brass from the IOC arrived for a fact-finding mission just as the Metro workers began another strike. A quick look through the records showed that the frequency of strike action meant there was a strong likelihood an Olympic year would be no exception. With little else to separate the bids, London was declared the winner.

True or not, the French establishment vowed revenge and last year president Nicolas Sarkozy pushed through a law forcing vital public services to provide a minimum service during industrial action. Railway workers will be among the state employees caught by the law.

Recent polls have revealed the confusion many French workers feel about the colourful and sometimes violent protests against Sarkozy’s welfare cuts and plans to end decades old employment protections. A majority say the reforms are necessary while telling pollsters they support the protests.

This perplexing need to adopt both sides of the argument has paralysed debate, especially on pensions and the totemic 35 hour week. Unlike Germany, which has spent 10 years discussing and implementing reforms with a view to becoming more competitive, the French have reached a position of stasis. Apart from the new strike law and bill freeing universities from state control, pensions reform is almost all Sarkozy has to show for his four years in power.

Next month the Paris-based think tank, the OECD, will publish its biannual report on the French economy. It is expected to argue the Elysée palace must move more quickly to tackle a low growth, high unemployment economy that could spark widespread social unrest .

Antonio Gurria, the OECD boss, will stand next to finance minister Christine Lagarde and politely urge her to free small and medium sized businesses from the straitjacket that has stifled growth and innovation for decades.

Innovation has tended to come from France’s industrial behemoths – France Telecom, Renault, engineering firm Alstom and Compagnie Générale des Eaux, the water company that spawned media giant Vivendi and Veolia, a waste management firm that empties many of the UK’s dustbins. Others such as Pernod Ricard and the luxury goods maker LVMH dominate their industries. However, the government’s support and reliance on their tax revenues has been at the expense of smaller firms.

The strategy is also undermined by the vulnerability of these large businesses to innovative rivals with access to cheap skilled labour. Renault and Peugeot have seen Mercedes, BMW and Audi sweep them aside in the race for Asian customers. Air France remains loss making and the oil business Total, with its close links to France’s former colonies, is vulnerable to the changing political weather in many of the world’s hotspots. Last week it was forced to suspend production in Libya and is embroiled in bribery allegations over deals in Iraq.

Hervé Boulhol, the OECD’s France expert, says the country’s finances have deteriorated for the last 35 years. Since the financial crash the situation has worsened. “The public finances must be fixed because while France has been largely immune to the worst of financial crisis, at least so far, it needs to address deep-seated problems,” he says.

Boulhol reels off a list of measures that Sarkozy could implement to bring the country more firmly into the 21st century. First it must get more women into work by reforming a tax system that encourages them to stay at home to reduce the household’s taxable income. The result is the lowest employment rate among the 30 rich nations assessed by the OECD.

Second, its benefits system, which accounted for 3.5% of GDP in 2005, first in the OECD rankings, must be reformed. It is a source of Gallic pride but the system is largely universal, and boosts the incomes of the richest, as much as the poorest. Boulhol describes it as “regressive spending” that would be better channelled to the poorest. It may be the main reason middle income couples have continued to have children, unlike Italian and German families, but offering the same benefit to the wealthy is “just about writing cheques to people who are not going to change their behaviour,” he says.

A third problem is that France has the largest number of people in retirement as a proportion of the overall population.

The battle last year, which saw school cooks join teachers, factory workers and students on the streets of Paris, Marseille and Lyon, was eventually won by Sarkozy. A law pushing up the minimum retirement age to 62 was passed along with measures that mean younger workers must wait till they are 67 to pick up their full entitlement.

Bruno Tardieu, a full time official at one of the country’s most active anti poverty groups, ATD Quart Monde, is concerned that a growing number of working class people are being shut out of the benefits enjoyed by a decreasing number of white collar workers. He says every town is blighted by high unemployment, while 26% of young people are out of work compared with 20% in the UK.

A volunteering scheme designed to put 200,000 young people back into the workplace is directed largely at college educated under 25s and not those with poor qualifications. Tardieu will meet government officials this week to focus on ways to include low skilled people in the scheme.

“It is elitist. Poor groups don’t know it exists. It offers very low pay. And it presumes the young person will be housed and subsidised by their parents, which is often not possible for people from poorer families,” he says.

Back at Insead, Sadoulet argues that the French fear of Anglo-Saxon capitalism has paralysed the debate and left poor workers to bear the brunt of globalisation.

The number of “year in, year out” workers are growing he says, as companies resist giving full benefits to new employees. After six months, staff accrue full employment rights. A short term, six-month contract can be rolled over for another term, but then the workers must be laid off. Studies show that after a year of work, usually on the minimum wage, these workers spend a year on the dole, hence the “year in year out” tag that dogs them.

“France has spent two decades ignoring the problem and the longer it is left the bigger it will become. The debate about what to do, who should shoulder the cost, and how best to encourage innovation, is in its infancy compared with the UK and Germany,” he says.

“There is still a knee jerk reaction that says simply tax the rich some more. But increasingly ambitious people are leaving, they are going to London, to Silicon Valley, and anyway, there simply aren’t enough rich people to pay for the current level of welfare bills”, Sadoulet says

Union leaders point to the success of the country’s banks and risk averse property market as reasons to be cheerful. Here was good reason to avoid the risk taking of the Anglo Saxons.

They have a point. Compare Sarkozy, who pledged €40bn (£35bn) to boost bank finances and a further €320bn to guarantee interbank lending, with Gordon Brown, who had to pledge about £850bn to prop up the British banking system, of which £117bn was pumped straight into the worst hit banks.

But while Britain suffers wild property crashes, prices in many areas of France keep rising and finished higher in 2010 on the year before despite predictions of a slump. The steady rise has taken prices beyond the UK and shut middle income families out of the market, or prevented them moving. The long-term effect is the same as in the UK, where the financial crisis has left the incomes and assets of the wealthiest largely untouched, while hitting the growing number of – young people, immigrants and unskilled workers – who stand on the outside of protected, unionised industries.

Much of the French establishment, like the wider population, supports the unions’ conservative, old world view that globalisation is to be feared, feeding the sense of paralysis.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010

Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.