Well, lets hope, for your sake, that the Giants show some arrogance today.
Lot of joy in Mudville from the Jets win yesterday. More than a little arrogance there.
As for the future, here's one hint of some interesting political work the Bushies will need to figure out. Membership in the Security Council changes with Germany taking over as council president in February. From your favorite newspaper.
Configuration of Security Council May Force U.S. to Renew Lobbying Over Iraq
By JULIA PRESTON
nytimes.com
UNITED NATIONS, Jan. 3 — It took nine weeks of exhausting negotiations for the United States and the other 14 nations on the Security Council to agree on a resolution on Nov. 8 to make Iraq give up its illegal weapons.
But just as the optimal cool-weather season for a military assault in Iraq's deserts approaches in February, the United States may have to go courting again here to secure the votes of five countries that became nonpermanent Council members on Wednesday.
In a routine annual rotation, Angola, Chile, Germany, Pakistan and Spain joined the Council for two-year terms, while Colombia, Ireland, Mauritius, Norway and Singapore stepped down. Four of the five departing countries — Mauritius was the exception — were solidly sympathetic to the Bush administration's goal of forcing Iraq to disarm.
Without veto power, the nonpermanent members cannot make or break a Council decision. But they broadly represent the views of their regions. When Syria added its vote in to complete the unanimous support for Resolution 1441, which set up the weapons inspections now under way, it sent a resounding message to Iraq and the rest of the Arab world.
The new configuration adds complexities for Washington. It gives the European Union much more potential clout, with Germany and Spain joining Britain and France, two permanent members with veto power.
But in negotiations about whether to begin a war with Iraq, it is not clear that the Europeans will see eye to eye. To win a tight re-election race last October, Chancellor Gerhard Schröder of Germany ruled out sending troops to war in Iraq. Spain, by contrast, has expressed readiness to fight alongside American forces.
France still hopes that inspections under way in Iraq will peacefully detect and destroy any prohibited weapons Iraq may have, while Britain remains America's most willing ally in the confrontation with President Saddam Hussein of Iraq.
Pakistan has been a useful United States ally in the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan and in the campaign against international terrorism. But it is also an Islamic country with grave concerns about the Bush administration's support for Israel, not to mention prickly issues of its own because of its decades-old standoff with India over the disputed territory of Kashmir.
Bulgaria, Cameroon, Guinea, Mexico and Syria remain on the Council as nonpermanent members for one more year. The other permanent members are China and Russia.
The next round of decision making on Iraq promises to be even more difficult than the first. The United States may have to persuade skeptical members to accept its interpretation of less-than-overwhelming evidence that Iraq cheated the inspectors by hiding illegal weapons.
American diplomats have their work cut out for them. In the normal distribution of assignments, Germany will hold the Council presidency for February, just when Pentagon officials could want to get the go-ahead to start a military operation.
Relations between President Bush and Mr. Schröder remain cool. But the United States ambassador to the United Nations, John D. Negroponte, gave a welcoming dinner for Gunter Pleuger, his new German counterpart, and has gone out of his way to keep the channels clear.
Mr. Pleuger has been careful not to tip his hand. He shrugged off a clumsy move by the United States to block Germany from taking over as chairman of an important committee, which monitors the economic penalties against Iraq. The administration finally had to drop its objections to Germany taking the post.
On Thursday, the German mission here handed out copies of an interview by Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer that appeared in the magazine Der Spiegel days earlier, in what diplomats took to be a plain signal.
In the interview, Mr. Fischer remained critical of the Bush administration's view that Mr. Hussein is unlikely to give up his secret weapons programs except by military force. But when pressed about how Germany would vote on Iraq, Mr. Fischer dodged.
"We have always made it clear that we will not send any soldiers," he said. "However, we support the United States in the antiterror coalition and it is in our vital interest that this coalition be continued."
In a German news interview Wednesday, Mr. Pleuger declined to predict how Germany would vote on Iraq in the Council. "No one can make such a prediction," he said, "because we don't even know if the Security Council will convene to address this question."
One senior Council diplomat said, "They are indicating that they will not be an obstacle to military action if the facts are there to show that Saddam is cheating, and the rest of the Council agrees."
The ambassador from Pakistan, Munir Akram, said his country would be inclined to see Iraq through the prism of Pakistan's old and dangerous conflict with India. Pakistan was happy to see Mr. Bush demand that the United Nations enforce its past resolutions requiring Iraq to give up its weapons. Pakistan has long insisted that India has failed to comply with resolutions on Kashmir.
"Our position always is based on the legal principle that the resolutions of the Security Council must be respected," Mr. Akram said. |
