|
Red America, Blue Europe: Europe Learns the Wrong Lessons
This is an except from an The American Enterprise (current issue) articleThe pattern stretches back to Korea For evidence that obstruction of the U.S. is more important to many European elites than making progress in the worldâs most dangerous flashpoints, look no farther than Afghanistan. The Afghan war was not controversial in Old Europe. It was universally agreed that the Taliban was a blight on central Asia, and that the al-Qaeda cells incubating in Afghanistan were a menace to the entire globe. Europeans accepted the urgent necessity of rooting out both entities militarily, and then rebuilding the Afghan government and civil society. But once U.S. forces had done the dirty work of eliminating Afghanistanâs fanatical ruling cliques, did our European allies live up to their promises to help update that nationâs infrastructure, train its police, build up its courts, revive its social sector and economy? Scandalously, no. As weâve been pointing out for two years (see TAEâs January/February 2004 issue, SCAN), the Europeans immediately fell way behind on their financial pledges. Their troop commitments were not met. The German promise to train the Afghan police became a joke. European offers to reconstruct the justice system went nowhere. In all of these areas, America had to step into the breach to help suffering Afghans, and stave off disorder and a re-emergence of terror cells. Truth be told, continental Europeans have been making themselves scarce during times of crisis for more than two generations. Their current claim is that lack of a U.N. mandate is what has prevented Europe from standing shoulder to shoulder with the U.S. since the 9/11 attacks. But the Old Worldâs failure to make any proportionate contribution to the war on terror is actually part of a long historical pattern. Consider their response the last time a large U.N.-commanded force went to warâin Korea. After North Korea invaded South Korea in 1950, the U.N. responded militarily. Of the 340,000 troops sent under U.N. control, how many of these do you suppose were European? About 5 percent. In the crunch, only Britain provided meaningful help, sending 14,198 soldiers at the Korean Warâs peak. The next biggest European contribution? Greece, with 1,263. France followed, providing all of 1,119 troops. The U.S., meanwhile, provided more than 300,000 fighters. Do the math and youâll see something interesting: The Korean War alliance included 16 nations, and America supplied 88 percent of the military manpower. The Iraq War coalition included 32 nations, and 85 percent of the G.I.s were Americans. (Poland, Holland, and the Ukraine each contributed more soldiers to the Iraq War coalition than the French did to the Korean War.) See a pattern? More at link Posted by: Captain America 2005-09-13 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=129365 |