Happy New Year. There seemed little cause for merriment Tuesday evening; flawed as 2002 was, few of us were happy to see it give way to 2003. Nearly all of us expect this to be a year of war, the only question is: how many?
Just as Washington was dissolving for the Christmas holiday, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in a reference to North Korea, claimed the United States could fight two wars simultaneously. I can’t give credit to Mr. Rumsfeld’s arithmetic, because if we come to blows with Iraq and North Korea this year, it won’t be two wars, it will be three. For 15 months, the Bush administration has been telling us we are at war with terrorism and in support of that war, we’ve sent troops to Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Georgia, Djibouti, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the Philippines. In the name of that war, the Bill of Rights has been sent to an undisclosed location.
In the past week, President Bush has mobilized more tens of thousands of troops to surround Iraq, preparation for war number two. Despite White House noises to the contrary, don’t be fooled into thinking success in war number two – Iraq – equals success in war number one – al Qaeda. It’s quite possible the opposite will be true. From where George Bush sits, the war in Iraq is designed, among other things, to distract the American public’s attention away from the lack of progress in the war on al Qaeda. From where Osama bin Laden sits, the Iraq war may give al Qaeda the opportunity to launch its next attack.
Then there’s war number three, North Korea. Unlike Iraq, North Korea already has nuclear weapons, probably two. In six months, Kim Jong Il may have five more. North Korea has a million men under arms just a few miles away from two key U.S. allies. North Korea, Iraq and Iran comprise Mr. Bush’s “Axis of Evil,” but fully-armed-right-now-North-Korean evil apparently does not merit the same response as maybe-someday-in-the-not-too-distant-future-armed-Iraqi evil.
Mr. Kim and Saddam are not exactly allies, but Kim is taking advantage of Saddam’s plight to advance his cause. North Korea is probing the U.S. to see if Mr. Rumsfeld’s numbers really do add up.
One of the more distasteful features of post-September 11th America has been the proliferation of talk show patriots droning away about the United States as the world’s only superpower, Pax Americana and the new age of empire. Our allies are getting sick of it too, the way we throw our weight around at the U.N. and in international conventions.
As the American military becomes more deeply engaged in the Persian Gulf and Mr. Bush refuses to be distracted, even by possible nuclear confrontation, who else will want to take advantage of W’s single-mindedness? Don Rumsfeld may find his mathematical exercise is not one of addition, but multiplication.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is bloodying up and promises to become moreso with an Israeli election scheduled and a Palestinian election cancelled. In South America, Venezuela – which supplies 20 percent of U.S. oil – teeters on the brink of revolution, Argentina melts in a pool of red ink and every faction in Colombia’s civil war is running drugs.
France and England are both being drawn into conflicts in West Africa. European intelligence agencies report al Qaeda has all but cornered the diamond market in Sierra Leone, Liberia and Burkina Faso in the past four years. How many troops can the Pentagon afford to send there?
If – when – the U.S. invades Iraq, it may touch off the global Islamic backlash Osama has been trying to foment for so long. What will happen in Algeria or Indonesia or Pakistan? Will the Iraq invasion be an opportunity for the Chechens to rise again against the Russians or an opportunity for the Russians to grind the Chechens further down? What about Libya, what about Syria? What will the reaction be in the Arab streets of Cairo and Yemen?
The Pax Americana types like to portray the U.S. as the world’s policeman, but a one-officer force is no match for a crime wave.
More War Than We Bargained For
Happy New Year. There seemed little cause for merriment Tuesday evening; flawed as 2002 was, few of us were happy to see it give way to 2003. Nearly all of us expect this to be a year of war, the only question is: how many?
Just as Washington was dissolving for the Christmas holiday, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in a reference to North Korea, claimed the United States could fight two wars simultaneously. I can’t give credit to Mr. Rumsfeld’s arithmetic, because if we come to blows with Iraq and North Korea this year, it won’t be two wars, it will be three. For 15 months, the Bush administration has been telling us we are at war with terrorism and in support of that war, we’ve sent troops to Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Georgia, Djibouti, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the Philippines. In the name of that war, the Bill of Rights has been sent to an undisclosed location.
In the past week, President Bush has mobilized more tens of thousands of troops to surround Iraq, preparation for war number two. Despite White House noises to the contrary, don’t be fooled into thinking success in war number two – Iraq – equals success in war number one – al Qaeda. It’s quite possible the opposite will be true. From where George Bush sits, the war in Iraq is designed, among other things, to distract the American public’s attention away from the lack of progress in the war on al Qaeda. From where Osama bin Laden sits, the Iraq war may give al Qaeda the opportunity to launch its next attack.
Then there’s war number three, North Korea. Unlike Iraq, North Korea already has nuclear weapons, probably two. In six months, Kim Jong Il may have five more. North Korea has a million men under arms just a few miles away from two key U.S. allies. North Korea, Iraq and Iran comprise Mr. Bush’s “Axis of Evil,” but fully-armed-right-now-North-Korean evil apparently does not merit the same response as maybe-someday-in-the-not-too-distant-future-armed-Iraqi evil.
Mr. Kim and Saddam are not exactly allies, but Kim is taking advantage of Saddam’s plight to advance his cause. North Korea is probing the U.S. to see if Mr. Rumsfeld’s numbers really do add up.
One of the more distasteful features of post-September 11th America has been the proliferation of talk show patriots droning away about the United States as the world’s only superpower, Pax Americana and the new age of empire. Our allies are getting sick of it too, the way we throw our weight around at the U.N. and in international conventions.
As the American military becomes more deeply engaged in the Persian Gulf and Mr. Bush refuses to be distracted, even by possible nuclear confrontation, who else will want to take advantage of W’s single-mindedness? Don Rumsfeld may find his mathematical exercise is not one of addition, but multiplication.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is bloodying up and promises to become moreso with an Israeli election scheduled and a Palestinian election cancelled. In South America, Venezuela – which supplies 20 percent of U.S. oil – teeters on the brink of revolution, Argentina melts in a pool of red ink and every faction in Colombia’s civil war is running drugs.
France and England are both being drawn into conflicts in West Africa. European intelligence agencies report al Qaeda has all but cornered the diamond market in Sierra Leone, Liberia and Burkina Faso in the past four years. How many troops can the Pentagon afford to send there?
If – when – the U.S. invades Iraq, it may touch off the global Islamic backlash Osama has been trying to foment for so long. What will happen in Algeria or Indonesia or Pakistan? Will the Iraq invasion be an opportunity for the Chechens to rise again against the Russians or an opportunity for the Russians to grind the Chechens further down? What about Libya, what about Syria? What will the reaction be in the Arab streets of Cairo and Yemen?
The Pax Americana types like to portray the U.S. as the world’s policeman, but a one-officer force is no match for a crime wave.