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: Ilaine who wrote (75408)	2/19/2003 12:23:26 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Just saw an interesting Charlie Rose show, with Jim Hoagland, Tony Judt and Michael Elliot (time editor at lart) talking about Iraq. Some obvious points of disagreement - Hoagland is basically pro-Bush in his position (he noted he was the only person there who was in Washington and had talked a lot to the Bush administration), Judt basically anti-Bush, and Elliot in the middle. Interesting points of convergence - they all agree that Saddam is the pretext for the American-European split, not the real cause of it. The Europeans all know that Saddam has WMDs, they just don't see why there should be a war now. The Europeans are deeply involved in process for process' sake. They all noted that Europeans also have bruised feelings because the Bush administration didn't talk to them enough, but the basic disagreement in outlook was real and structural and didn't depend on manners. Rose asked, how much difference did the abrasive Bush style make? Hoagland said 5%, at the margin. Nobody really disagreed. Both Judt and Elliot wished for the Bush administration to promise to tackle Israel/Pal just as soon as Iraq is done. Hoagland noted that Bush had already supported the idea of a Palestinian state, but the Palestinians had done none of the reforms demanded; he asked where the Europeans had been with their Palestinian clients when Barak was making his offers at Camp David and Taba? Everybody agreed the Europeans had been totally remiss. Judt and Elliot couldn't believe that the war in Iraq would help the Israeli/Pal situation any. Hoagland said that the Bush administration did believe it, and so did he. Personally, I think the whole linkage issue is just Europe making itself hostage to the meshugass of the Arabs. Run it in reverse, and see how silly it sounds - the Palestinians must not be allowed to get a state until the Kurds have a state and a political framework. Reverse linkage even makes more political sense as the Kurds are both more numerous and politcally far more astute.