| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Europe | |
| Europe will miss George Bush when he's not around | |
| 2008-06-15 | |
| The US President is a useful bogeyman - but his successor's policies may not be much different by Gerard Baker If there is one small, niggling, horribly ungrateful-sounding complaint about travelling on Air Force One, it is the complete lack of decent swag to carry home. From the moment that I had received word that we were to interview President Bush on the big blue plane this week, my family made it clear that I was to return home laden with Air Force One keepsakes. The last time that I interviewed George W. Bush, in the Oval Office, he reached into a drawer filled with presidential-seal-embossed gewgaws and presented them as offerings for my five daughters. So I figured that Air Force One would be no different. Even if there were no proffered take-homes, there would surely be some surreptitious carry-offs. Stories abound of first-time travellers on the presidential aircraft kitted out in extra large pairs of boots so that they could waddle off with every bit of plane that wasn't nailed to the floor or the walls. But I have to report that my house will never become a shrine of presidential hot towels, cutlery with the Great Seal of the United States engraved on it or specially embossed disposable lavatory seats. But other than that, the interview was, as you can imagine, a uniquely fulfilling journalistic experience. As he approaches the end of his term of office, Mr Bush was in expansive mood, reflective even. He betrayed just a hint of regret about some of the rougher moments in European relations during his presidency, and a surprisingly strong interest in leaving a legacy as a multilateralist and an accomplished diplomat. But there was a distinctly anticlimactic air to his last trip to Europe. The protesters have moved on these days; there is more boring agreement; the contentious issues have shrunk in scale. Mr Bush, of course, is more lame duck than poisoned chicken. The eyes of the world are on his successor. But I still harbour a conviction that for all their expectation of a brave new dawn, the Europeans are going to miss Mr Bush in ways that they are only beginning to understand. They'll miss, first, having a villain in the White House. It's a really convenient excuse to avoid doing anything yourself on pressing global concerns. And if Senator Obama wins, while the tone and nuances will sound more mellifluous to Europeans ears, most of those issues won't change, and some might actually become a lot worse. Despite the heat of Iraq in the presidential campaign now, I doubt that a President Obama will act much differently from President Bush, or for that matter from a President McCain. Conditions will either allow a quick US drawdown or they won't. Mr Obama will say more congenial things about global warming, Guantanamo Bay and the treatment of detainees (as will Mr McCain). But not being able to blame climate change on US greed and intransigence any more might pose problems for Europeans, and on the War on Terror, President Obama would have some demands of his own for them. He is certainly going to want more European effort in Afghanistan. European governments can conveniently hide behind anti-Bush sentiment now to resist those calls, but that won't work when St Barry is in the White House. What's more, the supposedly more multilateralist Mr Obama might have some unpleasant surprises. He is promising to start a new US-led diplomatic track with the Iranian leadership that could upset the delicate balancing act painstakingly constructed between the US, the EU, Russia and China. And when it comes to free trade he, like the Democratic Party, is decidedly not keen on being nice to foreigners. In truth, after the rough days of President Bush's first term, so much has changed in the past four years. The Bush team has curbed the rhetoric and realised that it needs friends, while new governments in Germany and France have tried to rebut the corrosive anti-Americanism in their countries rather than to exploit it. As an adviser to Mr Obama noted recently at a transatlantic conference in Washington, the differences for Europe between a first Obama administration and the second Bush Administration will probably be smaller than the differences between the first and the second Bush terms. My biggest worry, in fact, is that Mr Obama wins and the Democrats get a huge majority in Congress. The new president will be focused hard on two big policy challenges in Washington - dealing with Iraq and reforming US healthcare. He won't have a lot of political capital to spare to stand up to a resurgent Democratic Party in Congress over trade policy, and the US could slide further towards protectionism. Meanwhile, a big Republican defeat in November is quite likely to result in a very nasty isolationist turn inside the opposition party. The neoconservatives - those bad guys who believe that the US should spend blood and treasure trying to bring democracy to the great unwashed - will be discredited. President Obama could find himself under pressure from both parties in Congress to put US interests first. All of this means that the new president will have to spend a fair amount of time on trips to Europe explaining to his admirers why he really isn't able to deliver that much. At least he'll be allowed to walk off Air Force One with the fluffy, monogrammed pillows, though.
| |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #11 DRUDGEREPORT/WND/TOPIX > BUSH ORDERS:GET BIN OSAMA LADEN BEFORE I LEAVE OFFICE. Reportedly is also enlisting the help of BRITISH SPECOPS + MI6, etc. Wel-l-l, IMO any capture or killing of OSAMA BIN LADEN will be a de facto SERIOUS BLOW TO THE JIHAD + RADICAL ISLAMISM. HOWEVER, that being said, IMO THE SAME MAY HURT THE JIHAD, BUT NOT END THE JIHAD NOR STOP THE PRESENT DRIVE TOWARDS NUCLEARIZATION + STRATE WEAPONIZATION. (1) OSAMA, ZAWI, ZARK, MULLAH OMAR, ETAL. have given numerous indics that their support of Radical Islamism Ideo-Agenda including MILITANT JIHADISM goes beyond ANY PERSONAL FEAR OF CAPTURE OR DEATH. (2) EVEN PRESUMING THAT OBL PER SE IS CAPTURED OR KILLED, WOT > WAR FOR OWG-NWO + WAR FOR ANTI-STATUS QUO {Anti Current-Traditional Order] as per both RADICAL ISLAM + POST 9-11 AMERICA. NEITHER ONE NOR THE OTHER WILL HAd FULLY FAILED, NOR IN THE ALTERN HAD FULLY SUCCEEDED. IOW, A WAR FOUGHT, FOR ONE, UNDER THE PREMISES OF THE ANTI-STATUS QUO, ETC. ACHIEVED THE STATUS QUO, ETC. [imperfect], wid the agendums of both "NIPPED IN THE BUD" WHILE IN BEGINNING TO RISE. Islam has been shaken, but will most likely revert and remain intact, whereas for the USA its Regional-Global entrenchment is not yet permanent = embedded in solid bedrock. Reminds me of the FRENCH REVOLUTION which led to the RISE OF NAPOLEON + NAPOLEONIC WARS. INTERESTING > 2008 -2012 > "PRE-PERIOD" = ADVENT OF NAPOLEON INCARNATE versus ISLAMIST HIDDEN IMAM-MAHDI INCARNATE??? D *** NG IT,NOSTRADAMUS HAD IT WRONG - IT WAS NAPOLEON BONAPARTE, NOT GENERAL "CHINA" GORDON, WHOM FOUGHT THE MAHDI AT KHARTOUM! And where NAPOLEON INCARNATE GOES, his sister OWG MADONNA, ETAL. IS BOUND TO FOLLOW... But again, the LEFTIST SECULARISTS-ATHEISTS like to argue GOD DOESN'T AND DIDN'T AND WON'T AND NEVER .... EXISTED, CORRECT! SHARON STONE? > D *** NG IT, DADDY SAYS YOU'RE A BAD GERMAN + A NASTY BOY! |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2008-06-15 22:48 |
| #10 CONVENTIONAL WISDOM SUMMER + FALL 2008 > remains that, barring a major Major MAJOR M-A-J-O-R MCCAIN SCREWUP OR HEALTH PROB, BARACK IS STILL ANTICIPATED TO LOSE IN NOVEMBER. Perhaps more importantly, the DEMS are likely to control the Congress no matter whom wins the Presidency > AGAIN, MSM-NET = POST-DUBYA CONGRESSCRITTERS NEED TO FOCUS AND PRIORITIZE THE MYRIAD NATIONAL-GLOBAL ENVIRON CRISES AND RELATED PROBS [read - SPEND SPEND SPEND, REGUL + TAX +...], NOTSOMUCH ANYMORE ON FIGHTING THE ISLAMISTS IN THE ME. EVEN MANY CONSERVATIVE OR PRO-GOP/RIGHT PUNDITS BELIEVE THE DEMS WILL WIN THE CONGRESS. IOW, 2008-2012 POTUS Period = IRAN + ISLAMIST MILITANT-TERR GROUPS WILL GET THEIR NUKES, etc. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2008-06-15 22:15 |
| #9 Adios muchachos, auf wiedersehen, au revoir, arrivederci. It's been a real 90 years. Let's not ever do it again. |
| Posted by: ed 2008-06-15 17:09 |
| #8 A major issue in all of this is that any apparent American weakness in an Obama Presidency increases the likelihood of ovverreaching on the part of bad actors like Chavez and Ahmedinejad--which in turn will make conflict more rather than less likely. The Norks invaded the South when Truman conveyed the sense that South Korea was outside our security zone. When Saddam interpreted (or misinterpreted) April Glaspie's remonstrances, he invaded Kuwait. And when he thought that Russia, France and China would cover for him on WMDs, he became more defiant, which plainly increased the odds of OIF occurring. If this history is any guide, a feckless Obama Presidency all but guarantees conflict, most likely with Iran. (Mexico bears watching too. If the cartels keep getting stronger, it's going to get real interesting on our Southern border) |
| Posted by: charger 2008-06-15 16:38 |
| #7 There are 2 inconvenient facts about Euro-American relations: 1) Anti-Americanism became official EU policy early in the Clinton administration - long before President GW Bush. 2) Anti-Americanism is caused by internal EU politics. US policy does not cause European complaints. - If fact, US policy is irrelevent |
| Posted by: Frozen Al 2008-06-15 14:17 |
| #6 Baker is one of the more sensible sorts in the Euro media, but even he fully integrates many of the myths (and mythical concepts, like "multilateralism," whatever that might be) about Bush and foreign policy. He also conveniently inverts most of the boring, nerdy facts of the matter. Euro anti-Americanism was unprovoked, destructive, and proven wrong in every case where it wasn't delusional on its face ("climate change"). ABM Treaty abrogation? E-3 negotiations with Iran? Heck, even British military strategy in southern Iraq. Baker is good but the persistence of the make-believe world in his commentary is grating, maybe more so since he's sensible and not an hysterical anti-American sort. |
| Posted by: Verlaine 2008-06-15 12:41 |
| #5 Europe currently thinks that a President Obama will be much more in tune with them, but they're wrong. The Euros are not the ONLY ones living this dream. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2008-06-15 10:25 |
| #4 Nah, Blazing Saddles was funny. An Obama presidency won't be, except as very dark humor indeed. |
| Posted by: lotp 2008-06-15 08:12 |
| #3 Hmmm...Blazing Saddles. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2008-06-15 07:50 |
| #2 America's relationship to Europe has been compared to the movie "High Noon". An Obama presidency would be like "High Noon" without a sheriff. |
| Posted by: DMFD 2008-06-15 00:46 |
| #1 If there was some way for Russia to invade western Europe without having to pass through eastern Europe, I wonder how much of a debate we would have about whether to intervene or not. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2008-06-15 00:21 |