Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pointless shouting about world problems accomplishes little

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pointless shouting about world problems accomplishes little

    Ottawa Citizen, Canada
    October 17, 2007 Wednesday
    Final Edition


    Pointless shouting about world problems accomplishes little

    David Warren, The Ottawa Citizen


    Theodore Roosevelt's excellent foreign policy advice for superpowers
    -- "Speak softly and carry a big stick" -- was uttered a few days
    before the assassination of President McKinley in 1901 thrust
    Roosevelt himself into the presidency. He was quoting, incidentally
    -- an old West African proverb. And out of that quote came the
    phrase, "big-stick diplomacy."

    It was a moment when the United States was coming of age as a world
    power, and asserting herself in new ways. Yet the phrase developed
    the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, in which an earlier American president
    had served notice to the European powers, that while the U.S. would
    be neutral in rivalries elsewhere in the world, she would not abide
    any further European imperial adventures in the Western Hemisphere.
    As late as 1962, this secular doctrine was being invoked by President
    Kennedy, to warn the Soviet Union off an imperial adventure in Cuba.
    Yet like most constructions in words, it had borne a variety of
    interpretations in the intervening time, including Teddy Roosevelt's
    use of it to justify the United States' own imperial adventures in
    Panama, Cuba and the Dominican Republic.

    Not that I'm always opposed to imperial adventures; nor opposed to
    making dogmatic statements about world affairs. There is a time and
    season for everything, including "big-stick diplomacy" in its
    broadest sense. This is what the Bush administration is doing today,
    or trying to do, in confronting Iran. It is a task in which some days
    their only ally appears to be Hillary Clinton -- who, trying for her
    own purposes to sound presidential, seems no less willing to
    contemplate the use of force than the current U.S. defence secretary.
    And just yesterday she repeated Mr. Bush's exact words in Washington:
    "All options must remain on the table."

    Well, not quite the only ally in pressuring Iran, for the new French
    president, Nicolas Sarkozy, has also uttered the words "all options,"
    and already we see some prospect that the "Bush Doctrine" will
    outlive George W. Bush. It must: or there will soon be no West.

    Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin, visiting Iran after a little game he
    played with the Russian media (in which his security services leaked
    an implausible assassination threat against him in Tehran, so that he
    could swagger and shrug it off), has been enunciating something like
    the Monroe Doctrine in Russian.

    Russia and China together have been Iran's chief diplomatic
    protectors, sheltering the vicious regime of the ayatollahs against
    sanctions proposals at the UN. Russia has been the principal public
    source of aid and technology for Iran's vast nuclear complex at
    Bushehr.

    In Tehran yesterday, speaking directly of a common interest in the
    resources of the Caspian Sea, at a conference with all the states of
    the Caspian littoral, Mr. Putin was nevertheless able to insinuate
    indirectly that the affairs of nations in that region "ain't nobody's
    business but their own." The general impression in the West, and my
    own impression, is that he is seeing how far he can get with words
    alone, since the Russians themselves have been using every available
    pretext for withdrawing their workforce from Bushehr.

    Likewise with Mr Putin's recent threat to respond very negatively to
    the new U.S. missile shield, and the advanced bases the U.S. requires
    for it, on what the Russians call their doorsteps. But Russia is
    already behaving as if the Cold War never ended. What more can they
    do?

    We now have another profoundly complicating factor, consisting of
    words, and in the very same region. The Democrat-controlled U.S.
    Congress, under what passes for the direction of Nancy Pelosi -- a
    great enthusiast for empty gestures -- recently proposed a
    declaration condemning the massacre of well over a million Christian
    Armenians in the twilight moments of the Muslim Ottoman Empire,
    1915-17.

    One might say that this remains a sensitive issue in Turkey. And one
    might add, that the Turkish threat to withdraw American access to
    NATO bases in Turkey (through which a considerable proportion of
    supplies are directed to Iraq and Afghanistan), is real. Similarly,
    the Turkish threat to begin armed incursions into northern, Kurdish,
    Iraq, to settle scores with Kurdish ethnic incendiaries in Turkey
    itself. Or the Turkish threat to settle scores with neighbouring
    Armenia, directly. One might even understand why the Bush
    administration, from Mr. Bush down, has gone apoplectic in resisting
    this exceptionally stupid Congressional move.

    Which is not to say the Armenian massacre didn't happen, or that it
    does not merit the remembrance and condemnation of every sentient
    being.

    My point is rather Theodore Roosevelt's: that it behooves the U.S.
    and the West not to waste words in shouting, or in pointless
    historical scab-picking that will yield unintended present results.
    It behooves us rather to carry a big stick, and to be ready to use
    it. That, and that alone, is how peace is maintained, in this grimly
    real world: by powerfully discouraging potential aggressors.

    David Warren writes Wednesday, Saturday and Sunday.

    From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Working...
X