-Caveat Lector-

Via http://www.brookings.org/views/op-ed/haass/19990413.htm


So Is It Yes or No?

The New York Times, April 13, 1999
By Richard N. Haass, Director, Foreign Policy Studies

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Increasingly it seems that the Clinton Administration's foreign policy is
intended to minimize risks rather than maximize results. The result is bad
politics and bad policy.
Take the debate about ground troops in Kosovo. After weeks of ruling out
their use, the Clinton Administration is now sending mixed messages. On
Sunday, Administration officials, including Gen. Henry Shelton, the Chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, suggested that plans for ground troops exist
and could be taken off the shelf at any time. Yesterday, Defense Secretary
William Cohen said that the air attacks are increasingly effective, while
reiterating General Shelton's comments about ground troops.

What's going on here? It seems as if foreign policy is being driven by
public opinion. News photos of suffering Albanian refugees have had an
enormous impact on the American people; opinion polls indicate that about
half of them now favor sending ground forces into Kosovo. But the
Administration also seems to have no confidence that popular support would
survive the first casualties.

This is no way to make foreign policy -- or win a war. It is one thing to
rule out ground troops because they are not needed. It is something else
again to reject them out of fear that the American people will not back
their use.

Indeed, history suggests that Americans will support using ground troops,
even after the country suffers casualties. The public even supported the
Vietnam War for more than a decade despite the horrible costs. And it was
prepared to shed far more blood than proved necessary in the Persian Gulf
war.

The Clinton Administration must stop making vague pronouncements and clearly
state that ground troops might be necessary in Kosovo.

Certainly, such troops will be needed to protect the Kosovo refugees if they
are to return home. But the troops may be needed much earlier if the
Yugoslav Government refuses to withdraw from Kosovo.

Alas, the Administration's handling of this issue is not an exception. Much
the same pattern can be seen in its China policy, for example.

President Clinton has long supported an expansion of economic ties to China,
but he balked at signing a trade agreement last week that would have allowed
Beijing to join the World Trade Organization. This, even though China's
Prime Minister, Zhu Rongji, agreed to significant concessions that went far
beyond what the Administration itself had predicted. President Clinton
clearly feared a confrontation with members of Congress and many domestic
interests who are arrayed against closer United States links to China.

The price for such timidity is high. The United States lost a chance to
expand into one of the world's largest and fastest growing markets. And we
lost a chance to force China to play by the rules of the world economy.

The literature on leadership is filled with the need for executives to
listen. But there is such a thing as too much listening, especially when it
comes to fundamental questions of direction. At times leaders have to get
out in front, to persuade people to accept what they are not yet comfortable
with. In foreign policy as in all else, nothing ventured, nothing gained --
and, increasingly, much lost.

Copyright 1999 The New York Times Company


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Note: The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and should
not be attributed to the staff, officers or trustees of the Brookings
Institution.




~~~~~~~~~~~~
A<>E<>R

The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Every great advance in natural knowledge has involved
the absolute rejection of authority. -Thomas Huxley
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to