Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D. Long who wrote (70918)	2/2/2003 4:13:55 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 281500

George Will's columns have been off recently. One of the reasons I have not posted them. This one is on, IMO. washingtonpost.com Luck and Leadership By George F. Will Sunday, February 2, 2003; Page B07 Regarding Iraq, the president, a baseball man, has been lucky. But as baseball's Branch Rickey said, luck is the residue of design. In two eventful weeks, the president's policy of regime change has been advanced, in part inadvertently, by the uncoordinated activities of three unlikely parties -- France, chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix and Secretary of State Colin Powell. The consequence is that many critics of the president's policy have been intellectually disarmed. France stumbled usefully when Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin declared that force would be unnecessary because Iraq's programs for developing weapons of mass destruction have been "largely blocked, even frozen." Leave aside the semantic latitude in "largely," and the opacity of "blocked" and "frozen." De Villepin was conceding the existence of forbidden programs, accepting their continuing existence and thus asserting France's indifference to U.N. Resolution 1441. The bloody-mindedness of France, which put Powell through weeks of torturous negotiation of 1441, may have propelled Powell to the brink of Rumsfeldian impatience with "old Europe." Concerning which: Are soon-to-be inductees into the European Union -- Poland and the Czech Republic, for example -- less authentically European than France? Is that written in the European constitution? No, there is no constitution because "Europe" remains a geographic rather than a political denotation. What is the pedigree of the idea that France, more than, say, the United Kingdom or Italy -- whose leaders visited the White House last week -- speaks for "Europe" more than do the eight nations whose leaders on Wednesday endorsed U.S. policy? (The combined population of Britain, Spain, Italy, Denmark, Portugal, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland is 232 million. The combined population of France and Germany is 143 million.) France has a population significantly smaller than, and shrinking relative to, the populations of, among many other nations, Vietnam and Egypt. France has a per capita GDP smaller than that of Denmark or Japan, among others. So why should France referee the game of nations? European critics of the president's policy spent the past six months urging deference to Powell. Now what, Powell having said there are "connections" between the Iraqi regime and al Qaeda? Critics of the president's policy, who made recourse to the U.N. the sovereign imperative, are now reduced to saying that military action is not justified even by Iraq's comprehensive violation of 1441, passed unanimously by the Security Council just 12 weeks ago. Many of these critics sought to paralyze the president by leashing him to the United Nations. Now they are discovering that Bush is holding the leash. It is because only he pays it the compliment -- a barbed one -- of insisting that the United Nations surely meant what it said about what constitutes a "material breach" of 1441. Is this Bush insistence what Sen. John Kerry, who wants Bush's job, considers Bush's "blustering unilateralism"?