Thursday, June 14, 2007

Bush's European Disaster

by Sidney Blumenthal

Bush's European Disaster

selected quotes (boldface text is mine, italics are from the original):

High officials of European governments describe U.S. influence as squandered and swiftly eroding (one minister went down a list of Bush administration officials, rating them according to their stupidity), the country's moral authority nil. Lethal power vacuums are emerging from Lebanon to Pakistan, and Europeans are incapable on their own of quelling the fires that burn far closer to them than to the United States through their growing Muslim populations and proximity to the Middle East. ... Their faint hope -- and it is only a hope -- is that they have already seen the worst and that it is not yet to come. Even worse than Bush, from their perspective, would be another Republican president who continued Bush policies and also appointed neoconservatives. That would toll, if not the end of days, then the decline and fall of the Western alliance except in name only, and an even more rapid acceleration of chaos in the world order.

In Rome, on June 9, a reporter asked Bush about setting a deadline for Kosovo independence. "What? Say that again?" "Deadline for the Kosovo independence?" "A decline?" "Deadline, deadline." "Deadline. Beg your pardon. My English isn't very good." Bush then declared, "In terms of the deadline, there needs to be one. This needs to come -- this needs to happen." The next day, asked when he would set a deadline, he replied, "I don't think I called for a deadline." Reminded of his previous statement, Bush said: "I did? What exactly did I say? I said, 'Deadline'? OK, yes, then I meant what I said."

...Bush's proposal to put tracking stations for a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic gave Putin his opening. In response, he offered a radar site in Azerbaijan to be jointly operated by the United States and Russia. Bush had deployed the wrong tactic on behalf of the wrong strategy. Bush's missile shield has not been proved to work, has cost hundreds of billions of dollars, and has an uncertain purpose. Is the plan meant to reassure eastern European nations of the former Warsaw Pact, Donald Rumsfeld's "new Europe," against Russia, or is it a short-term ploy to rally support in the one region in the world that still likes Bush because of deep residual pro-Americanism? If Bush intended to persuade Putin to temper his authoritarianism, he only succeeded in antagonizing the Russian leader. As Bush's "freedom" agenda has collapsed, he has reverted to a Plan B for a new ersatz Cold War. His ham-handed move allowed the adroit Putin to change the subject and corner him. Meanwhile, the engagement of Russia in areas of mutual interest -- containing Iran -- languishes.

3 comments:

Gonzo said...

Surely you are kidding me?

A European official ranking Bush administration officials in stupidity? That counts for anything? That matters?

OK, exercise your brain. Since Blumenthal (yeah, an objective source there) is too lazy to actually quantify why another Republican would cause chaos on the world order, can you?

Or is this just another ankle-biting commentary by an extremely partisan source that you echo without truly being cogniscent of the issues and able to debate them?

Oh, also, someone please tell Mr. Blumenthal that France just elected a pro-American conservative. And that Eastern Europe worships Bush like a rock star.

And that Putin is having his opponents locked up and killed.

But don't let the facts get in the way of being pithy and cute.

SeattleSusieQ said...

'And that Eastern Europe worships Bush like a rock star."

They worshipped Clinton, too. Your point?

Putin is bad, Bush is worse. Your point?

There are no facts in question here.

Gonzo said...

They worshipped Clinton, too. No argument. But Blumenthal does not state this issue and infers as fact that all of Europe disdains Bush when that's bullshit.

So, obviously, that's a "fact" in question.

My point is that if the premise is extremely flawed, as Blumenthal's is, how can a rational thinker accept any of his conclusions?