Mr Chirac's new stance is in contrast with that of the European Union, which said in a statement few days ago that suspending enrichment activities was "no longer a voluntary confidence-building measure but an international obligation" for Iran to get engaged in any sort of negotiation on the subject.

Distancing itself from the EU stance, does bring France more in line with two other veto-yielding permanent Security Council members -- China and Russia -- who have already been opposing any kind of sanctions against Iran on the nuclear issue.

Interestingly, Chirac's remarks have also severely undermined the three-nation group leading EU negotiations on Iran, which includes France itself, along with Britain and Germany. Nonetheless, this situation has once again ignited the debate on the need for coherence and unison in the sphere of EU foreign policy particularly in the context of growing role of the White House in world affairs.

The fact is that, owing to the lack of a coherent and concrete foreign policy structure, the European Union has not been able to demonstrate its true influence across the globe and it is still struggling to be an effective player in global politics.

Despite his desperate efforts to change the situation and to enable the EU to play its due role, Javier Solana, the European Union's dynamic foreign policy chief, has not been able to show any tangible progress in this direction. Since June this year, he has been making a serious effort to project the European Union as an important player by negotiating a package deal with Iran.

Basking in the limelight, he has been visiting Tehran with an unusually delicate mission of package deal to defuse the gathering storm over Iran's nuclear ambitions. Though serving essentially as a postman to the EU and five permanent members of the Security Council, he still has managed to at least register the European Union's presence in contentious global issues like Iran's nuclear standoff.

Solana, former Spanish foreign minister and NATO secretary general, started his job -- with a cumbersome formal title of high representative for the common foreign and security policy -- in 1999 with high ambitions. But ever since, he has been just trouble-shooting.

Despite being a key donor across the globe, the problem with the European Union is that it has miserably failed to dictate or influence the complexion of major global issues like the Middle East, UN reforms, the Iraq quagmire, etc. On all these issues, the dearth of synergy and coordination is quite visible in the EU foreign policy.

"Unsatisfactory coordination between different actors and policies means that the EU loses potential leverage internationally, both politically and economically," is how the commission president, Jose Manual Barroso, put it recently.

The problem lies very much within the intricate EU architecture where the foreign policy still remains the jealously guarded preserve of the member states, with only a limited role for the supranational European Commission despite having a dedicated commissioner for external relations. The existing national disagreements among the member states have frequently scuttled many attempts towards a unified EU stand on different international issues.

Interestingly, the EU's new constitution has not only identified this congenital anomaly but also tried to address it promptly by establishing a well-equipped European diplomatic service -- having both authority and responsibility to run the show as one voice for the European Union and Solana as its head with the title of EU foreign minister.

However, last summer's defeat of the constitution in the referendums in France and the Netherlands has put the brakes on all that. Without the constitution, Solana remains outside the commission as a handicapped manager, with no direct control over 6 billion euro external aid budget -- the main lever that can make the European Union a key and influential player in global politics.

So, a unified EU foreign policy will remain an elusive dream until the establishment of a "constitutional" EU foreign policy department. There is not a single binding factor in the existing arrangement that has the potential to add the element of synergy in EU foreign policy.