Wednesday, May 04, 2005

Another Lefty Convert to the Bush Doctrine

In today's (ultra left-wing) Guardian, Max Hastings drops plenty of "DBs (damning buts) into an otherwise sober assessment of middle-East progress:
The greatest danger for those of us who dislike George Bush is that our instincts may tip over into a desire to see his foreign policy objectives fail. No reasonable person can oppose the president's commitment to Islamic democracy. Most western Bushophobes are motivated not by dissent about objectives, but by a belief that the Washington neocons' methods are crass, and more likely to escalate a confrontation between the west and Islam than to defuse it. . .

The Bush vision is founded upon the exercise of military power. It is hard to regard Condoleezza Rice's "charm offensive" or the state department's protestations that in the second Bush term diplomacy will blossom, as more than cosmetic. The president himself has declared that, while he welcomes more allies, they must accept that the game will be played on Washington's terms.

We must respect American power, and also acknowledge that the world sometimes has much need of it. As Sir Michael Howard, wisest of British strategic thinkers, often remarks: "If America does not do things, nobody else will." We should acknowledge the limitations of the UN. The pitiful performance of many international peacekeeping contingents, not least in Afghanistan, highlights the feebleness of what passes for European security policy.
(via LGF)

1 comment:

MaxedOutMama said...

Maybe it's not so much our power as our use of it. Plenty of countries have power, but if we look around the world it hasn't been used very well, has it?

I would still like to see this grudging admission that maybe Bush and Blair had a point turn into more western will to try and see that the people in underdeveloped countries don't have to fight tyranny and mass murder as well as poverty.

Because the truth is that US power is limited, and the challenges in the world are beyond our single scope. Also I dispute the imputation that Bush's vision for the world is founded upon military power. It is not really. It is founded on the idea that we mean what we say and we will do whatever it takes to see that those principles get a chance in the world. That is a very different thing.

In a way, he is using the concept of "American power" as a deflection of what should be his logical conclusion - that Europe, as well as America, should use their power to assist the Middle East and African peoples to resist oppression.