I'm stunned to hear such strong words from you.
well, I always felt that way about some of their folk, but assumed they would be kept in check by others with more sense, or would moderate a bit over time. Instead, the opposite has happened--the hardliners have been given free reign and have been emboldened rather than reined in. So after a while one gets exasperated and feels obliged to call a spade a spade.
Is this a common belief in Washington?
"Washington" is a vague construct. Personally, I discount basically the entire political class of the country as a bunch of partisan hacks devoted to an agglomeration of special interests of one sort or another, so I don't really care what those types think or say. As for what passes for a foreign policy "establishment" these days, however, yes, there is widespread concern now about the damage being done (by the Bush administration's tactlessness) to Nato, the UN, and America's general international image and position.
Unlike the protestors in the streets, the establishment tends to disagree less with the substance than with the style of the administration's foreign policy. Unlike the neocons, who love nothing more than a good fight against overwhelming odds (something that would confirm their self-image as embattled crusaders for truth, justice, etc., against a world of wimps and appeasers), the Establisment types see themselves as the natural, benevolent leaders of the world and are mortified that this general status is being brought into question.
tb@yup.com |
