1.30.03 @ 12:02AM
They evidently have learned more from history than ''old Europe'' has.
After months of sniping and argument, America's allies are
finally beginning to speak with a unified voice when it comes to
Iraq. Canada isn't among them, not surprising since Prime Minister
Jean Chretien's recent statements concerning Canadian involvement
in a war against Iraq are so convoluted that four major newspapers
reported four different policy positions on the subject the same
day.
Nor are U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's "old Europe"
members of the club. France, which unilaterally and without U.N.
permission sent troops into the Ivory Coast, and Germany, whose
major corporations may have helped Saddam Hussein's weapons
programs, remain at least for the moment on the sidelines.
Rather, some unlikely countries have, to use Chretien's
post-September 11 promise, decided to stand shoulder to shoulder
with the United States even if reluctantly. Jordan, Oman, Qatar and
the United Arab Emirates are actively assisting the United States
while Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Syria and even Iran are quietly
providing support or about to openly declare it. For some of these
countries throwing their lot in with America's is merely an
exercise in realpolitik -- more in response to continued American
aid then any real desire to fight terrorism -- but help it is
nonetheless.
President Bush had it exactly right when in the aftermath of the
terrorist attacks at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon that
America's real friends wouldn't be those who immediately had words
of condolence, but rather they would be the ones who stuck with the
country as it exacted its revenge on al Qaeda and the Taliban and
embarked on a wider campaign against terrorism and its supporters.
What began with worldwide expressions of sympathy and solidarity
now sees world leaders -- allegedly allies -- work openly to block
America's wartime agenda.
Assisting America in what seems an inevitable war in Iraq is a
risky proposition for Hussein's neighbors. The weapons of mass
destruction that the Bush Administration believes Iraq possesses
could just as easily be turned on them -- it already happened to
Iran -- as Israel or the United States. Some of them, like Jordan,
are reliant on trade with Iraq to maintain their weak economies.
Yet despite that they are showing greater leadership then nations
like Canada, France and Germany.
Although everyone is downplaying the recent hard feelings that
the U.S. and several European nations are expressing towards each
other it's hard not to look at it as the continued reorganization
of global politics in the wake of September 11. As Rumsfeld pointed
out, Europe is literally shifting towards the east with the
addition of several former Warsaw Pact members to NATO, essentially
making Germany and France far less important to America's foreign
policy. The Bush Administration knows the continued intransigence
of nations like Germany and France in expanding the war on terror,
one those two nations have largely sat out, spotlights two
competing views of the world.
European leaders like to argue that because their nations
suffered so much during the Second World War they view it as a
moral imperative to prevent war. Unfortunately they never learned
why that war took place. By appeasing Adolf Hitler they eventually
created an enemy too strong to be stopped easily. By preventing a
preemptive war they promise to create a Saddam Hussein with weapons
far more powerful and dangerous than Hitler ever possessed.
The Arab nations lining up to help America in the event of a war
with Iraq may not have altruistic motives or even want Hussein
deposed, especially since it means they could be next, but you can
at least admire the fact they show more sense than the allegedly
responsible nations of Europe. When it comes to the judgment of
history, Europe will once again fall short.
topics:
Trade, Iraq, Iran, Israel, NATO
