January 10, 2008
WAIT'LL THEY GET A LOAD OF MAVERICK:
New U.S. president won't fulfill all Europe's desires (Judy Dempsey, January 10, 2008, IHT)
Certainly the attacks of Sept. 11 and the invasion of Iraq transformed the United States and the trans-Atlantic relationship. But change was already taking place after the end of the Cold War nearly 20 years ago. On Bill Clinton's watch, the United States swung back and forth between multilateralism and isolationism, while at the same time asking the Europeans to carry more of the burden in defense and peacekeeping.Clinton did not venture into the Middle East to bring his stature to bear on negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians until his second term. His administration refused to submit the UN Kyoto Protocol on climate change for ratification and did not support the new International Criminal Court. But Clinton's charm and persuasion helped to shield America from criticism.
The Bush administration continued these policies, using a much blunter tone. It unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty it signed with the former Soviet Union in 1972, which forbade the testing and deployment of a ballistic missile defense system. It signed a pact with India, supporting its nuclear weapons program, which further undermined the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. Yet when President Vladimir Putin of Russia suspended participation in the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe last month, there was an outcry by the United States and the Europeans. They cast Putin as a potential spoiler of the post-Cold War order, ignoring what Washington had done earlier. So far, neither Republican nor Democrat candidates have suggested returning to the ABM treaty.
Then there is NATO, which Clinton had reservations about. In 1999, he cajoled the military alliance into bombing Serb targets in order to stop the ethnic cleansing of Kosovar Albanians. But NATO's European allies were hard-pressed to provide even basic logistics.
The alliance was further downgraded after Sept. 11. When the former secretary general of NATO, George Robertson, pushed through a declaration under Article Five of the NATO treaty, which commits member countries to defend an ally that has been attacked, Bush turned down the offer. The Pentagon did not want any interference by a multilateral alliance. That decision dented NATO's pride. Small wonder that NATO European allies, led by France and Germany, stopped the alliance from supporting the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
It is a misnomer to call Chirac and Schroeder allies--they were objectively pro-Saddam and anti-American. Not coincidentally, their people dispatched them and replaced them with more Anglospheric leaders who will get to follow President McCain into Iran. Posted by Orrin Judd at January 10, 2008 8:20 AM
That decision dented NATO's pride. Small wonder that NATO European allies, led by France and Germany, stopped the alliance from supporting the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
That's some definition of "ally". My dictionary says "An associate who provides cooperation or assistance" and doesn't say anything about "but who opposes you if he gets in a snit".
Clinton signed the Koyoto to please the left, he did not submit it to Senate for ratification because of its sure 90-0 defeat. But the Treaty would be binding on the US if enough nations were cajoled to sign it. China and India were excluded from Koyoto restrictions but signed it nevertheless to make it binding on the US. Thus weasel Clinton could please the left and still claim that he opposed it for not sending it to the Senate.
ABM was signed with the Soviet Union. No more Soviet, no more Union, no more ABM Treaty. The Conventional Armed Forces Treaty was signed in 1990, and enforced by Russia in 1992. Thus Putin is a spoiler.
NATO in Afghanistan: the French are guarding the safest area, are not allowed to fight; the Dutch depend on the Germans for transportation, and have to stop in the middle of a battle because the German helicopters have to go back to base before sun down. Chirac's cronies were up to their necks in Saddam's Oil-for-Fraud, Schroeder was paving his way to be chairman of Gazpom's board. We would be in real deep doodoo if we had to rely on our NATO "allies".
Dempsey is a lazy fool.
Posted by: ic at January 10, 2008 4:13 PM"THE FORMER SOVIET UNION" I can't get enough of that phrase.
As to the axis of weasels, watch deeds, not words. They can say they don't want us to be the world government, but they act as though they are most accepting of it.
Posted by: Lou Gots at January 10, 2008 6:36 PM