----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Brin-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 11:14 AM Subject: Re: Landmines Compromising Re: US Foreign Policy Re: *DO* we share a civilization? >When this happens, I think that the American view of European > diplomacy becomes rather jaundiced - we tend to believe that the purpose of > the exercise was to embarass the United States, not actually to achieve > anything. I make, I think, an honest effort not to attribute the actions > of anyone to malice without strong efforts. Yet I am unable to generate > another explanation for the refusal to grant the United States (and South > Korea, of course) a temporary exemption for the Korean peninsula, given the > rather unique situation there. Can you supply one? I think I can. Lets assume that there is a tendency in Europe for people to view the US as overbearing and always wanting special exceptions to rules that govern the rest of the world. Everyone else is willing to give up land mines, but the US wants an exception for themselves. Most people in Europe do not have an in depth knowledge of the particulars of the situation in Korea. They know that the US wants their way again, and feel that what's good enough for everyone else should be good enough for the US. They view their politicians agreeing with the US as caving in again to an overbearing power. Given that situation, which requires Europeans to be no more ignorant of Korea than many Americans, the politicians can give the US the concessions it needs to sign the treaty and bear the heat at home, or don't give the concessions and gain political capital. It doesn't take malice to make that decision. Now, I'm not sure this is what happened, but it is an explaination that does not include malice. Dan M.
