By Jed Babbin on 9.10.02 @ 12:04AM
The Western alliance's biggest enemy is not al-Qaeda or Saddam but an arrogant bureaucracy located right in its capital.
"No Action, Talk Only" is how NATO is known to many who have
served at its Brussels headquarters. The low opinion of NATO held
by many of our professional military appeared unjustified after
9-11. On 12 September 01, for the first time in its history, NATO's
leadership invoked Article 5 of its charter. Article 5 says that
every ally will come to the aid of one that has been attacked by
taking action it "deems necessary," including armed force, to
"restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area."
Until 9-11, all that meant in practical terms was that America
would drive the next round of invaders out of France. But now,
NATO's biggest enemy is not al-Qaeda or Saddam. It's an arrogant
bureaucracy located right in NATO's hometown. It's called the
European Union, and it is at war with NATO.
When the EU was created, its mandate was economic cooperation.
By eliminating tariffs and moving Europe toward a single currency,
the theory was that an economic power would be created that would
rival the United States. But to combine the economies, as its
proponents knew, much more had to be done. Now the EU sits atop a
bureaucratic colossus, with regulatory powers over everything from
taxes to the color of cheese. (It's one of the great ironies of
Europe that Ireland -- which is an EU member, but has not
surrendered its tax authority to Brussels -- has both the lowest
tax rates and the highest growth and productivity there.) No
bureaucracy is satisfied with the power it has. It always wants
more.
A couple of years ago, the EU wanted to set up its own "fast
reaction" force to settle conflicts such as the Bosnia mess. On the
surface, it seemed a good idea because we have always wanted the
Europeans to take more responsibility for crises such as that one.
More importantly, it gave some credence to the idea that Europe --
which for decades had neglected its military to a positively
Clintonian degree -- might actually invest in rebuilding its
defenses. But then reality started happening. First, the EUnuchs
made it clear that no spending increases would be coming, and then
they said that their private army would be independent of NATO --
i.e., independent of American command or influence. The wheels fell
off their tricycle when about a dozen British and French retired
generals and admirals pointed out that such a force couldn't
possibly work. As they warned in a letter to a London newspaper,
paper tigers burn.
Having failed to create its own army, the EU now wants to
interfere with NATO's ability to function as a military alliance.
The EU has decided to do it in the most dishonorable and
underhanded way. If it succeeds, it may interfere with the coming
war against Saddam's regime.
Turkey, our most under-appreciated of allies, has been jumping
through EU hoops for years in order to gain admission. Turkey's
inexpensive labor is seen (by France and others) as a threat to
their own overfed workers, who regard a thirty-six hour workweek as
virtual slavery. Turkey's economy, however, is not strong and has
been suffering from inflation and bad investment. The EUnuchs
continue to hold out the carrot of membership to Turkey, promising
all the benefits of free trade, if only one more condition is met.
When one is met, another one is added. The most recent is the most
dangerous.
President Bush has formally rejected the Rome Treaty creating
the International Criminal Court. That court is supposed to have
jurisdiction over all war crimes, but its mandate doesn't require
adherence to the Geneva Conventions or what we understand to be
fairness in criminal trials. In short, it's a politicized tool of
those who would interfere with American policy by hauling our
generals and politicians into court on charges such as
"environmental damage," which it includes in the definition of war
crimes. The U.S. asked the U.N. for a resolution granting Americans
immunity from ICC prosecution when on U.N. "peacekeeping" missions.
The EU opposed that resolution, and President Bush settled for a
partial immunity.
At the same time, we have asked many of our allies to sign
non-extradition agreements with us which say that Americans on the
territory of the allied nation cannot be extradited for an ICC
prosecution. Israel -- the other obvious ICC target -- signed such
an agreement very readily. Romania -- also applying for EU
membership -- did, and got a severe scolding from the EU. Turkey
wanted to. But the EUnuchs told Turkey that if it signs such an
agreement with us, it can't be an EU member. That's blackmail, and
a direct interference in Turkey's ability to perform its
obligations as a NATO member. It's also a direct attack on our
ability to fight Saddam.
Turkey is Saddam's northern neighbor. Its bases, troops, and
diplomacy are all an important -- and available -- part of our
strategy to rid the world of Saddam's threat. The EU thinks the ICC
is more important than that threat, and that we will concede the
issue because Turkey is essential to our plans.
We should counter the EU's ploy with all the tools at hand.
First, we should offer Turkey a NAFTA-like free trade agreement
with us, which would benefit it more than EU membership. Let's tell
the ICC and the EU that no matter when or where they try to haul an
American before their court, we will not allow them to compel him
to submit, with or without a non-extradition agreement. The
pressure on the EU should be enormous. EU members can, if they
want, control the EU's arrogance. If they do not, EU members may
soon have to choose between NATO membership and EU membership. If
they are so unwise as to allow that choice to become imminent, we
should do nothing to relieve the pressures we create.
The EU -- and others, such as Russia and China -- are
positioning themselves to make money on Saddam's demise. We should
be telling them that their shopkeepers will be unwelcome where
their troops have not gone. There is no reason for us to topple
Saddam merely to fatten the coffers of the EUnuchs. Saddam
delenda est.
topics:
Taxes, Trade, Environment, Military, Russia, Israel, European Union, NATO