The Ivory Coast, once one of Africa's relative success stories, has been plagued for years by political and military crises.

The latest flashpoint started last November, when then-incumbent President Laurent Gbagbo refused to accept results of an election that international and Ivorian observers determined he had lost.

The resulting warfare between forces loyal to Gbagbo and Alassane Ouattara -- formerly the prime minister and the rightful winner of the election -- took a dramatic and welcome turn on Monday when Gbagbo was captured from his bunker in the presidential palace.

Hundreds on each side have lost their lives during three months of fighting, and atrocities have been committed.

In a society riven by religious, ethnic and economic divisions, outside adjudication, potentially from the International Criminal Court, is needed to give Ivorians some sense of justice.

The seemingly successful resolution to the standoff is in America's interests, which include promoting democracy in Sub-Saharan Africa, just as it is trying to do in North Africa and the Mideast.

Credit is due to Ivorians, who risked their lives to ensure their election, and their future, not be stolen. But credit is also due to French forces.

The French military intervention is just the latest combat role for the country. President Nicolas Sarkozy was also outspoken in the need for international intervention in Libya.

His efforts, along with those of British Prime Minister David Cameron, leaders of the Arab League and others, resulted in a United Nations Security Council authorization to impose a no-fly zone over the country in order to avoid a slaughter of Libyans who are rebelling against longtime leader Moammar Gadhafi.

As in Libya, France acted in the Ivory Coast under U.N. auspices. Both actions are part of an emerging foreign-policy doctrine deemed "right to protect," which authorizes urgent action by the international community to protect innocent civilians.

Recent failure to act against obvious threats of war crimes has often shamed the world in places like Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur.

France's diplomatic and military muscle in the Ivory Coast, Libya and Afghanistan is consistent with a foreign policy that in the past has committed troops in the Balkans, Niger, Somalia as well as other countries.

But France is still viewed with outdated skepticism by some. This suspicion was brought into "bold relief" during the Iraq war, according to Ron Krebs, associate professor of political science at the University of Minnesota.

"The sense that the French are a bit fickle and mercurial, and not tried-and-true partners, is one that goes well back in the history of American foreign policy, despite a long history of common values and French-U.S. involvement."

To be sure, America will remain the indispensable nation in international military policy. The Libyan military intervention, for instance, would not have happened without acquiescence from the Obama administration.

But France's actions have helped America. The willingness of the French to share the diplomatic, military and financial burdens won't keep an unstable world from turning to our country for help, but it's essential to have internationally invested partners.

Those who harbor hostility from the Iraq war era, when France was derided as part of "Old Europe," and french fries were renamed "freedom fries," should acknowledge that more often than not, France is part of the solution, not the problem, which is a welcome development to an overextended America that can't be, and doesn't seek to be, the world's policeman.