• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Pierre Vimont"
  ],
  "type": "other",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Europe"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Transatlantic Cooperation",
    "Europe’s Southern Neighborhood"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
  "programAffiliation": "EP",
  "programs": [
    "Europe"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Europe",
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Western Europe",
    "France",
    "Iran"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

Other
Carnegie Europe

France Does Not Want Boots on the Ground in Syria

France will call for improved military and intelligence cooperation among the different actors in the anti–Islamic State coalition, but deploying troops in Syria is not on France’s agenda.

Link Copied
By Pierre Vimont
Published on Nov 24, 2015
Program mobile hero image

Program

Europe

The Europe Program in Washington explores the political and security developments within Europe, transatlantic relations, and Europe’s global role. Working in coordination with Carnegie Europe in Brussels, the program brings together U.S. and European policymakers and experts on strategic issues facing Europe.

Learn More

Source: Deutsche Welle

MICHAEL KNIGGE: During his visit to the White House, French President Hollande wants to push President Obama towards a more robust military strategy against the Islamic State in Syria. Do you think Hollande can convince Obama who has opposed repeated calls for a larger US military role in Syria to change course now?

PIERRE VIMONT: It depends on what one means by a robust coalition. If it is about better coordination, more sharing of intelligence among all the different actors in the coalition, I think both sides agree on this and have made some progress there. If you try to look at other aspects of the coalition then that can become a bit more difficult. One is about whether there should be boots on the ground. I think on this issue not only the American administration, but the French government itself is somewhat worried about such a perspective. I think it's not in the intention of the French government and President Hollande to move along that line.

Then it's the whole issue about other participants in the coalition, about Turkey and the role they could play, about Saudi Arabia and the support they have given to other militias inside Syria and then this becomes a more political dimension for the coalition. I think it is there where there could be interesting and useful discussions in Washington between President Obama and President Hollande.

To follow up again, if this visit is supposed to be more than a public solidarity gesture, what concrete steps then can the US take to help France against ‘Islamic State'?

From a military view, the US has played a major part and set up the coalition and time and again convened the partners to improve cooperation. But now that we have had those terrible terrorist attacks in Paris the need for improved cooperation has become much more pressing. The first thing is to share information and intelligence much more closely with a stronger participation on both sides in order to coordinate the airstrikes in a much better way to be more effective on the ground. That's the two key first things: sharing information and coordinating military action. This is what can be done and that is why President Hollande is travelling to Washington with the military officers responsible for the French intervention at the moment in Syria. I think this is where a lot more can be done in a very concrete and practical way, so there is much better cooperation and coordination which was not exactly the case so far.

Washington meanwhile is worried about Hollande reaching out to Moscow, where the French President will meet with Russian President Putin later this week to discuss military cooperation between Russia and France against the Islamic State. The US is concerned that Paris may be open to ease sanctions against Russia for its behavior vis-à-vis Ukraine in return for Russian military help in Syria. What's your stance on a possible nexus between Ukraine and Syria?

I honestly don't think there is a nexus between Ukraine and Syria. I think the reality of diplomatic action at the moment is that for the time being at least these things are quite different – two different crises and two crises on which work needs to be done on its own merits. Discussions here in Brussels at the moment among the 28 EU member states are very much focused on the implementation of the Minsk agreements and whether there is de-escalation on the ground. The situation, as you know, is still very fragile, so the trend at the moment among the 28 member states is much more in favor of extending the sanctions for the time being rather than changing course there. Heads of state and governments will discuss this in December. But Ukraine is being looked at on its own merits.

As to Syria, I think it is a totally different crisis. And here on the discussion that President Hollande could and will have with President Putin in Moscow, the issue will be much more on whether both sides now focus their efforts much more on striking ISIS than the Russians are doing at the moment. If President Hollande is able to convince President Putin to move in that direction, I don't see why Washington should feel unhappy with that because this is something they also have been asking Moscow to do for some time.

President Hollande has called for an international coalition against the Islamic State. Do you think such a coalition is realistic given the still very different interests of key players like the US, Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia or Turkey in Syria?

I think to some extent everybody agrees that they want to fight ISIS – even Turkey and Saudi Arabia would agree on this. The problem is that quite often they have different priorities. Turkey is focusing much more on the Kurdish issue and Saudi Arabia is thinking much more about its difficult relationship with Iran. So it is trying to convince these different partners to focus for the time being on the fight against ISIS and then maybe later again revert back to their other priorities. I agree with you that it is still a very difficult task that President Hollande has in front of him. But it's not because it is difficult that you should not try to convince your partners of your own opinions.

This interview was originally published by Deutsche Welle.

About the Author

Pierre Vimont

Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe

Vimont is a senior fellow at Carnegie Europe. His research focuses on the European Neighborhood Policy, transatlantic relations, and French foreign policy.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    Europe on Iran: Gone with the Wind

      Pierre Vimont

  • Commentary
    Potential Peace in Ukraine Is a Moment of Reckoning for Europe

      Pierre Vimont

Pierre Vimont
Senior Fellow, Carnegie Europe
Pierre Vimont
SecurityEuropeNorth AmericaUnited StatesWestern EuropeFranceIran

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Man standing next to a pile of burned cars
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Myriad Problems With the Iran Ceasefire

    Four Middle East experts analyze the region’s reactions and next steps.

      • Andrew Leber
      • Eric Lob
      • +1

      Amr Hamzawy, Andrew Leber, Eric Lob, …

  •  A machine gun of a Houthi soldier mounted on a police vehicle next to a billboard depicting the U.S. president Donald Trump and Mohammed Bin Salman, the Crown Prince and Prime Minister of Saudi Arabia, during a protest staged to show support to Iran against the U.S.-Israel war on March 27, 2026 in Sana'a, Yemen.
    Collection
    The Iran War’s Global Reach

    As the war between the United States, Israel, and Iran continues, Carnegie scholars contribute cutting-edge analysis on the events of the war and their wide-reaching implications. From the impact on Iran and its immediate neighbors to the responses from Gulf states to fuel and fertilizer shortages caused by the effective shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz, the war is reshaping Middle East alliances and creating shockwaves around the world. Carnegie experts analyze it all.

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Can NATO Survive the Iran War?

    Donald Trump has repeatedly bashed NATO and European allies, threatening to annex Canada and Greenland and deploring their lack of enthusiasm for his war of choice in Iran. Is this latest round of abuse the final straw?

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz, ed.

  • A person faces away from the camera wearing a yellow jacket with "PRESS" printed across the back
    Paper
    The Impact of Ending U.S. International Media Assistance

    The future looks bleak for independent media worldwide, but there is a robust infrastructure of knowledge, organizations, and people to build upon.

      Daniel Sabet, Susan Abbott

  • Map of Hormuz shipping traffic on a smartphone screen
    Commentary
    Emissary
    “It’s Not Like Turning a Switch On and Off”

    Why the Iran ceasefire isn’t a quick fix to the Strait of Hormuz energy crisis.

      Helima Croft, Aaron David Miller

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.