July 10, 2004
ONE LUCKY MORON:
Much of world is more peaceful (Jonathan Power, July 9, 2004, Boston Globe)
Briefly put, the world is more at peace than when he came to power. The big powers have never been so relaxed with each other since the late part of the 19th century and the early years of the 20th, and the number of small wars -- ethnic disputes, tribal conflicts, and territorial disputes -- has been going down every year.Through all the vicissitudes of Iraq, the Bush administration has managed to keep relations with Russia at their calmest and most fruitful since before the Russian Revolution. [...]
With China, after a rocky start, one gets the same sense of cooperative peace. Without turning a hair, the Chinese voted for the recent UN resolution empowering US peacekeeping in Iraq. the Bush administration has prevailed upon Taiwan not to rock the boat, and it seems to accept that China has no great extraterritorial ambitions outside of Taiwan, Tibet, and the mineral riches of the South China Sea, all of which it has decided to manage and live with without overt conflict.
Bush has handled the Turks with adroitness. Surprised at their last-minute refusal to disallow passage of US troops to northern Iraq at the onset of the war, Bush kept his mouth shut and has now become Turkey's main cheerleader for its admittance to the European Union.
With Iran Bush has been right to keep the pressure on the Europeans to be more assertive in persuading it to be honest about its nuclear bomb program. Unlike Bill Clinton, he has taken Russia's commercial interests in Iran's nuclear power program much more into account. And it could well be he will have the success there that he has had in Libya, where Moammar Khadafy has been persuaded to cease bomb research. [...]
With most of the Indian subcontinent the future has never looked so promising since the British left in 1947. Although there seemed to be no reason go to war in Afghanistan, and the "war on terrorism" would be better left to police work than military action, there is still room for hope -- despite the shortcomings in aid promised to Afghanistan -- that the country now has some chance of escaping from the worst of warlordism and poverty. India and Pakistan look as if both sides are moving toward making peace over Kashmir. India is on the path to becoming a big economic power, even more than China, but it will not be hostile either to the United States or China. The United States, albeit belatedly, has decided unambiguously to be India's friend.
With the UN, despite early animosity, the United States has ended up supporting peacekeeping operations in a sustained way far more than Clinton ever did -- five operations in Africa in just the last year.
Even if you buy the thesis that this is none of Mr. Bush's doing, why get rid of a guy who's this lucky? Posted by Orrin Judd at July 10, 2004 3:52 PM
How can you state that "there seemed to be no reason go to war in Afghanistan" and then, literally in the same sentence, that "the country now has some chance of escaping from the worst of warlordism and poverty"? It seems that people today can establish their intellectual credentials by ostentatiously denying the everyday reality accessible to mere rubes like me.
Posted by: djs at July 10, 2004 7:33 PMLet's see. He's appeased China, Turkey, Pakistan and North Korea and shown no interest in distant people of whom he knows nothing (Kurdistan).
Who does that remind you of?
Posted by: Harry Eagar at July 11, 2004 2:01 PMReagan?
Posted by: oj at July 11, 2004 2:06 PMHim too.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at July 11, 2004 4:33 PMGive the rest of our Presidents more of what RWR and GWB drank.
Posted by: jefferson park at July 12, 2004 12:16 PM