PhotoDude.com

Wed. Aug 14, 2002

Swinging the Big Pendulum

Swinging the Big Pendulum – USA Today has an article headlined ”Global warmth for U.S. after 9/11 turns to frost” which explores the ever more visible gap between the views of Americans and Europeans, and how it’s being expressed in Europe: "Here in Britain, the United States’ staunchest friend, snide remarks and downright animosity greet many Americans these days. It’s not just religious radicals and terrorists who resent the United States anymore."

Interesting. I don’t doubt it at all (the article has several examples), nor do I doubt that if it was widely believed Muslims were on the butt end of nothing but "snide remarks and downright animosity" from most Americans, that we would be roundly condemned for our narrow views. We’d also be condemned for thinking that all Muslims were exactly alike, all believing the same thing, and each a fair target for vilification as an embodiment of their leader’s policy.

Just as each and every Brit supports and embodies all of the policies of Tony Blair. But, hey, it sure does make the world a simpler place to ”understand,” as well as target your paintbombs (we’ve moved way beyond the broad brush).

"Many are enraged by Bush’s support for steel tariffs and farm subsidies, his refusal to involve the United States in the new international criminal court and what is widely regarded abroad as one-sided support for Israel and its prime minister, Ariel Sharon."

I guess I’m liable to be accused of Not Being A Predictably Loathsome American, but I don’t exactly toe the line on just that one sentence of grievances, nevermind the many others presented in this article. Steel tariffs; bad in content, worse in timing. Farm subsidies; some bad, some good, most simply bloated. International Criminal Court; fraught with potential for abuse, and too bereft of protections beyond the repeated assurances ”that would never happen.”

Does this make me a Canadian or something?

And I have to tell you, I’m a little bit over the European criticism of "what is widely regarded abroad as one-sided support for Israel and its prime minister, Ariel Sharon." Almost every attempt at peace among Israel and the Palestinians (and the Egyptians, too), failure or success, has in some way gone through American territory. Camp David. Akron. The White House. The shuttle diplomacy, other than occasional UN attempts, is almost always performed by the US; a Powell, a Zinni, a Mitchell, a Tennet, etc.

Where have the Europeans been? Well, I guess we can point to Oslo Accords of 1992. A decade ago. Rather than simply complain about the ”one-sided support” of the US, the only power who has made a decades long effort at peace (no matter how fractured it has been), why not stop being a relative spectator, and Monday Morning Quarterback? Get in the game. Why not make the logical leap to proclaim the superior European Method of engaging the world by launching a serious peace initiative for the Middle East? Any one European government could grab the mantle on this, or they could do it collectively as the EU.

Surely there must be many profitable approaches to peace that the Neanderthal Americans have never explored. Why doesn’t some European power simply make us diplomatically irrelevant by grabbing the process by the horns for themselves? Even Saudi Prince Abdullah managed to put something on the table as a proposal. When will European interest expand beyond criticizing our efforts (or lack thereof) to making efforts of their own?

"Anti-Americanism is nothing new. Surveys a decade ago in Britain showed that one in four people here are what pollster Robert Worcester, a transplanted Kansan who runs the Market Opinion Research Institute, calls ’culturally anti-American.’ (According to a survey taken in 1989, one in five said they found American accents irritating.) To some degree, the resentment against the United States is inevitable now that it’s the only remaining superpower [...] In April, the German news magazine Der Spiegel reported that less than half (48%) of Germans consider the United States a guarantor of peace in the world, compared with 62% who did in 1993. Nearly half 47% rated Americans as aggressive rather than peaceful (34%). And 44% called them superficial."

So, we’re superficial and have irritating accents. And although we were in one way or another the ”guarantor of peace in the world” (Europe in particular) for the vast majority of the 1900’s, now that the threats to Europe are gone, we no longer have that title. OK, there’s actually some logic buried within that, but the portrayal is that this change in perception is solely due to our actions. It also due to the change in environment, a change that we fostered (see Reagan, Ronald: ”Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”).

"Meanwhile, in an April poll for the Council on Foreign Relations, based in Washington, Europeans proved highly critical of Bush and what they label his unilateral approach to foreign policy: 85% of Germans, 80% of French, 73% of Britons and 68% of Italians said they believed that the United States is acting in its own interest in the war on terrorism."

I’ve never been able to follow this train of thought. The U.S. alone is attacked by terrorists. The U.S. responds by waging war on these terrorists, acting solely in its own interests. The interests of the only country attacked. To Europeans this is somehow [a] surprising and [b] a Bad Thing.

In 1940 and 1941, Britain acted in its own interests while war was waged against it. Pretty much unilaterally, until Dec. 7, 1941. Even then, I doubt seriously that they would have allowed any restraints to be placed on their actions by those who weren’t under attack themselves. After 9-11, America will clearly wage war in whatever form it deems necessary against those who would still like to kill thousands more of us. If others elsewhere in the world find this surprising, or ”A Bad Thing,” in my opinion they suffer from a combination of naivete and the cocooned comfort that decades of peace have brought. Peace bought by American will, American policy, and American military might.

We lived in that cocoon for a while, too, but we don’t any more. However, we still have that will, and that might, and we will follow the policies we feel are necessary to defend us. To expect any different, to quote the kids, is ”so September 10th.”

Sometimes the pendulum swings hard. For about 20 years, with the exception of the Persian Gulf War, America has been viewed as a pushover by many in the Middle East. Kill a bunch of Marines in Lebanon, and they’ll go away. Kill some Rangers in Somalia, and they’ll go away. Blow up a ship in Yemen, and they’ll stop making port calls there. Kill hundreds and wound thousands by blowing up two of their embassies, and you’ll get million dollar missiles blowing up ten dollar tents, plus lots of free publicity. No matter what you do to the Americans, they will never risk their precious troops in war.

Now, " ’What I hear from people all the time now is that we’re going to go to war with just about everyone and we don’t need a coalition to do it,’ Magnet says. ’It’s obvious they are very, very disturbed by the power America now has.’ "

Then the pendulum has indeed swung hard, but message is getting through. Plot against America, and even though you might succeed in killing thousands of us, we will hunt you down using weapons you didn’t even know we had, and we won’t care what our allies or enemies have to say about our strategy or tactics. We don’t need no steenkin’ coalition. We’re Crazy Cowboy Americans, and there’s no telling what the hell we’ll do next, except everyone is saying ”we’re going to go to war with just about everyone.”

Sure we are. Spread the word.