To paraphrase Pogo, we have met the enemy, and he is us. Al Capp’s swamp philosopher knew full well the extent of human folly, most often evident during times of international conflict. War can make people and nations of all stripes to unite against the enemy; perceived or real, ideological and personal differences are laid aside.
Post-war, a healthy society looks back and analyzes steps taken, their necessity, and whether the outcome was the desired one. Hindsight is always 20/20, yet when it comes to the aftermath of the “successful” Operation Freedom, the jury is certainly out. While the oppressive Iraqi dictatorship was toppled there is no proof that any of the Hydra’s many heads were chopped off - Saddam Hussein is purportedly alive and well.
Make no mistake (to use one of President Bush’s favourite emphatics): the casus belli was justified. Beyond a doubt, proven by the UN’s own statistics, more civilians -women and children - died yearly under Saddam’s regime than during either Desert Storm or Operation Freedom.
As is being argued daily, Iraq is close to becoming a Vietnam or an Afghanistan - take your pick. It is simply impossible to use democratic peace-keeping methods against determined guerilla attacks. History has shown, that only totalitarian regimes, suppressing actual attacks as well as brutally punishing those bold enough to attempt to inform the rest of the world of the truth, have had any degree of success. As Chechnya shows, even that is no guarantee of victory.
In truth, opponents of Bush and the U.S. can make many valid points. Why Iraq? Why not the Congo - or any of a number of brutal dictatorships? As of late, the more cynical have been pointing towards business as usual, at all costs, behind the selective actions of the Americans.
This point was forcibly brought home last week. On July 1st the United States announced that it was cutting off military aid to 35 countries that support the International Criminal Court but have not exempted Americans from prosecution in the tribunal. Among the 35 are the 3 Baltic Republics.
Now, curiously, the United States signed the 1998 treaty that created the court. The ICC has been up and running since last year, its mandate is to try war crimes and acts of genocide. To date, the tribunal in The Hague has focussed on alleged Balkan war criminals.
The ICC is backed by most European countries, but the Bush administration fears that the tribunal might hear “politically motivated” prosecutions of U.S. military and civilian leaders. As far as is known, there are no Lt. William Calleys out there, the U.S. military should have nothing to fear. The concerns about political motivation are real, however - witness the growing number of anti-American protests globally.
Of note here is how the Baltics reacted. After all, as part of the New Europe, future members of NATO, the Balts were quite vocal in their support for Operation Freedom and the Bush administration. The pusillanimous French (now, to their credit, getting involved in Africa) were vilified in the Western press, little was said about the support of smaller European nations.
Latvian president Vaira Vike-Freiberga demonstrated a cool head after the July 1st announcement. She did not consider the halt in U.S. military aid as a snub: “There is no place for personal insults in international relations.”
Would it, that Bush saw things the same way. Although no American president has been free of criticism (Wilson, Roosevelt and Truman all faced considerable domestic opposition for certain war-time decisions), Bush is forgetting America’s unique role today,as international policeman.
Rather than as a benevolent but strict, no-nonsense hall monitor, the Americans are acting quite like a petulant school bully. It is patently ridiculous as Vike-Freiberga noted, to take international affairs on a personal level. Bush may be right in seeking to protect American servicewomen and men, but the hands-off approach to the ICC supporters certainly does not inspire confidence in what the U.S. thinks of the potential good - or bad- that such an international tribunal might do.
[The Baltic countries have already received most of their U.S. military aid for this fiscal year. An Estonian governmment official suggested that EU membership is more important than U.S. military aid at the moment. A Lithuanian official pointed out her country’s active support in Iraq, and suggested that Bush make exceptions - such as the waivers given to 22 countries (such as Uganda, Nigeria and East Timor!)].
This insular approach may confirm what Charles Kupchan, professor of international relations at Georgetown University, postulates in a fascinating new book, “The end of the American era.”
Building on earlier arguments made by Francis Fukuyama, John Mearsheimer, Paul Kennedy and Samuel Huntington, Kupchan warns of epochal changes - of the paradox of America’s power today. America and Europe are parting ways, once again discord rules. Decades of strategic partnership are giving way to renewed geopolitical competition.
Kennedy’s brilliant 1988 work “The rise and fall of the Great Powers” was built on the premise that military power is ultimately detemined by the material resources at their disposal. Kupchan notes that America is on the wane, a united Europe on the rise, and eventually, Asia, once more. A multipolar world is predicated by the end of the industrial era and the rise of the digital age. Bush and the Americans are exerting America’s last gasps at keeping the unipolar system alive.
It seems that the American strategy today with regard to the rest of the world acknowledges Kupchan’s premise - that the world better get ready to start imagining life after Pax Americana. Only foresight will enable the global community to weather the turbulent years that accompany the decline of a world power. Even a public American return to the Monroe Doctrine would not change the slide - the world has indeed changed.
The heavy-handedness of the Bush administration post Afghanistan, inter Iraq brings to mind the comment of Canada’s only Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Lester B. Pearson, uttered during the Suez crisis. “The grim fact is that we prepare for war like precocious giants and for peace like retarded pygmies.” Sadly, Bush and his arrogant advisors are proving Mike right.
Leader: Of pygmies and giants (1)
Viimased kommentaarid
Kommentaarid on kirjutatud EWR lugejate poolt. Nende sisu ei pruugi ühtida EWR toimetuse seisukohtadega.
Kas keegi ei viitsiks seletada, mis mõte on ingliskeelsetel artiklitel Eesti Elus? Kellele need on lugemiseks mõeldud? (ammu olen tahtnud küsida..)
Arvamus
TRENDING
