Bernard Kouchner: Precariously Balancing on the Humanitarian Pedestal

In a time when non-governmental organizations have controversial degrees of influence on states’ foreign policy, it is always interesting to encounter an occasion where the two worlds seem to collide in both a peaceful and a productive way. When in a rather puzzling move President Nicolas Sarkozy appointed Bernard Kouchner (see left, during a recent trip to Africa) as his foreign minister in 2007, it was assumed that this would be an example of such an instance. Kouchner, 69, is most prominently known as the co-founder of the 1999 Nobel prize-winning Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), and has dedicated his life to fighting against humanitarian injustices all over the world. Having had Jewish grandparents who perished in the Nazi death camps during World War II, Kouchner is a firm believer in the Quaker notion of bearing witness, and as such has "an individual engagement" to expose and prevent mass killings “based on personal obstinacy.” Although in general Kouchner is greatly admired for his work as a humanitarian, in recent weeks he has found himself under heavy fire following the release of the book, Le Monde Selon K. Investigative writer Pierre Péan, who, according to UK's The Times, is considered to be “one of the most prolific and successful French investigators of political scandal,” wrote the work in question. The controversial allegations that appear in the Le Monde Selon K, notably the assertion that Kouchner repeatedly blurred the line between public and private activities during his career as a consultant on health matters in Africa, suggest a desire on Péan’s behalf to tarnish the reputation of the world-renowned do-gooder. It has thus provoked divided responses as to whether or not his claims of Kouchner’s alleged immorality should hold weight or be cast off as completely ludicrous. Having explored the blogosphere for posts that tackle the debate surrounding the French foreign minister, I chose to highlight two that I found to provide compelling insight into this issue. The first, titled “Bernard Kouchner prepares for the fight of his life,” was written by Henry Samuel, the French correspondent for the Telegraph. The second, “In defense of Bernard Kouchner,” was written by Andrew Murphy as a guest post for the politics and art compilation blog, Harry's Place. My reactions to both of these posts are included below, and are also available by way of comments posted at each of the respective sites.

“Bernard Kouchner prepares for the fight of his life” (comment)

This is a remarkable post which effectively explores the rationales behind Péan’s denouncement of Kouchner in his book, Le Monde Selon K, and specifically sheds light on the likely possibility that political tensions played a large role in provoking the accusations. While Sarkozy’s appointment of Kouchner as foreign minister in 2007 was certainly a bit of a conundrum considering the political orientations of the men, I was not aware that the rapport between the two was strained, nor was I aware of the high probability that “the Elysée…provided Péan with material” for his book. However, although I understand that Péan and other socialists perceive Kouchner as having abandoned his party when he accepted Sarkozy’s cabinet position, I have to wonder if there are more egotistical reasons that propelled the writer to take such a slanderous and even at times anti-Semitic stance on Kouchner as a person. Perhaps there are additional details of their past interactions to which the public is not privy that would substantiate their current rapport (or lack thereof)?

While Péan certainly did initiate controversy over the exact intentions of the foreign minister, in questioning the nobility of the “white knight” with the intent to “scratch the gold off the icon” it seems that the most prominent accomplishment of his work was proving to Kouchner that despite all of his amazing feats in the humanitarian realm, he still has many foes. In your post you imply that this may one of the most definitive moments in Kouchner’s career; do you personally believe that he will make it out unscathed, or instead will his enemies be triumphant in using this incident to lead to his potential demise? While evidently there are those who believe that he merits the negative publicity, I’m hopeful that the public will not be easily swayed by Péan’s words; after all, despite his extraordinary compassion for humankind, Bernard Kouchner remains a human being who, like the rest of us, is destined to have some flaws.


“In defense of Bernard Kouchner” (comment)

I’m very glad to read that there are those out there who also found Péan’s attack of Bernard Kouchner to be unfounded and lacking serious evidence. Although the investigative journalist has surely raised questions that merit exploration, Kouchner has many accomplishments which in essence contradict that of which is he being accused; after all, why would someone who has dedicated his whole life to exposing and combating human rights violations knowingly throw his reputation away? What I found particularly interesting was your suggestion that had Kouchner not taken a stance on Iraq which was perceived as “pro-American,” it is likely that he would not be facing such allegations today. Even the cover of the book (see right) attempts from the get-go to persuade readers that there is a strong link between Kouchner and President George W. Bush, when he was in actuality against the Iraq war but even more so against the suffering and atrocities that were occurring in the country under Saddam Hussein. As you mentioned, in 2003 when he did not follow “most of the French left into knee-jerk anti-Americanism,” Kouchner was rendered an outcast of the Socialist party, ultimately being expelled from it “when he joined the center-right Sarkozy government." Indeed, there are many around the world that believe Péan’s work to be primarily motivated as a result of his disdain for Kouchner, with rumors that it was the “betrayed” members of the left who provided the author with much of his material. As is evident with his unique stance on Iraq, Kouchner remains an iconoclastic figure exactly because he refuses to automatically conform to the desires of others, regardless of their political nature.

I am also astounded that there are those who see payment for his time as a consultant to states such as Gabon and Congo as unwarranted; certainly Kouchner deserved to be paid for the time and effort he put into ameliorating the health systems, regardless of the whether or not the leaders are considered questionable? Kouchner has been taking politically salient stances on controversial issues since the early 1970s, and as one who consistently promotes the importance in upholding human rights it is, as you precisely put it, “ no shock that Kouchner’s organization would be in those countries.”