-Caveat Lector-

From
http://www.latimes.com/news/comment/20001024/t000101382.html
Back to story

Tuesday, October 24, 2000
Bush-Rice Plan Identifies U.S. Interests
By CHRISTOPHER LAYNE
     Foreign policy finally has emerged as a campaign issue, sparked by the
proposal advanced last Friday by Texas Gov. George W. Bush's top national
security advisor, Condoleezza Rice. Rice stated that one of the first
priorities of a Bush administration would be to have the Western Europeans
assume full responsibility for NATO's peacekeeping in the Balkans. Predictably,
the Bush-Rice plan was denounced by Vice President Al Gore, and other senior
administration officials, as both reckless and proof that Bush is too
inexperienced to be entrusted with the presidency.
     Stepping back from exaggerated, partisan criticism, the proposal, which
aims at a new "division of labor" within the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization, has considerable merit. Explaining the plan's logic, Rice stated:
"This comes down to function. Carrying out civil administration and police
functions is simply going to degrade the American capability to do the things
America has to do" in regions outside Europe where the U.S. has vital security
interests.
     At one level, the Bush-Rice plan can be seen as just another chapter in
the 50-year saga of NATO debates about "burden sharing." Yet, these repeated
calls for Western Europe to do more, so the U.S. can do less--for a more
rational trans-Atlantic strategic division of labor--are the proverbial tip of
the iceberg, beneath which lurk fundamental questions about the following: the
often divergent geopolitical interests of the U.S. and its European allies; the
proper scope and extent of NATO's role; and how the risks of defending the
alliance's members from external threat should be shared.
     The plan reflects an important truth: Western Europe does have the ability
to perform the Balkan peacekeeping mission without American assistance.
Moreover, the European Defense and Security Policy (EDSP)--the European Union's
foreign policy and security counterpart to its political and economic
integration--has the even more ambitious goal of investing Western Europe with
the military capability to deal on its own with post-Cold War security threats.

     Though professing to welcome EDSP as an instrument to attain a fairer
distribution of the alliance's burdens, the Clinton administration regards this
West European initiative as a threat to NATO's existence, and has warned the EU
strongly that EDSP should not be used to promote a truly independent Western
Europe. The administration's stance reflects Washington's similar long-standing
ambivalence about Europe.
     This fear is not without foundation. In 1965, Henry A. Kissinger, then a
Harvard professor, observed that if Western Europe ever achieved political and
economic unity and strategic self-sufficiency, it would be for the purpose of
advancing its own interests, not America's. While this is true, there is
nonetheless a powerful argument that, in the long run, trans-Atlantic relations
would be healthier and more stable if based on Western Europe's independence
from, rather than dependence on, the U.S.
     If implemented, the Bush-Rice plan, which implicitly is linked to EDSP's
success, would transform the trans-Atlantic relationship--and NATO--in
important ways. The weight of history supports the plan. The Atlantic
alliance's original architects, for example, never intended that the U.S. would
be responsible for Europe's security in perpetuity. For them, the alliance was
intended as a temporary shield to allow Western Europe to recover from World
War II, at which point Western Europe would resume the full responsibility for
managing its own security affairs.
     Ten years after the Cold War's end, a rethinking of the U.S. role in NATO
is long overdue. Historically, America's only strategic concern in Europe was
to prevent a single power from dominating the Continent's resources and using
them to threaten the U.S. With the Soviet Union's collapse, this specter of a
European hegemony has disappeared. The Continent's post-Cold War security
concerns are quite different: nasty but small-scale conflicts such as those in
Bosnia and Kosovo. Such conflicts do affect Western Europe's interests, but are
peripheral to America's strategic concerns, which increasingly are centered on
East Asia and the Persian Gulf.
     The fact is that although Western Europe remains important to the U.S., it
is much less so geopolitically and economically than it was during the Cold
War. At the same time, other regions correspondingly have become more salient.
Beneath official declarations of harmony, U.S.-West European relations have
been fraying for some time. Western Europe and the U.S. are locked in a bitter
economic rivalry, and their political interests often clash. The bonds of trans-
Atlantic solidarity are vanishing as the Cold War generation dies out. Most of
all, Western Europe resents America's cultural and political dominance.
     Bush recognizes that the U.S. needs to exercise its power with restraint,
lest America's current geopolitical preponderance trigger a geopolitical
backlash against the U.S. Seen from this perspective, the Bush-Rice plan is the
first step toward establishing a new U.S.-Western Europe relationship based on
equality. As such, it should be seen as a potentially wise and far-sighted act
of statesmanship.
- - -
Christopher Layne Is a Visiting Scholar at Both Ucla's Center for Social Theory
and Contemporary History and the Cato Institute
Copyright 2000 Los Angeles Times
A<>E<>R
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.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Integrity has no need of rules. -Albert Camus (1913-1960)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The libertarian therefore considers one of his prime educational
tasks is to spread the demystification and desanctification of the
State among its hapless subjects.  His task is to demonstrate
repeatedly and in depth that not only the emperor but even the
"democratic" State has no clothes; that all governments subsist
by exploitive rule over the public; and that such rule is the reverse
of objective necessity.  He strives to show that the existence of
taxation and the State necessarily sets up a class division between
the exploiting rulers and the exploited ruled.  He seeks to show that
the task of the court intellectuals who have always supported the State
has ever been to weave mystification in order to induce the public to
accept State rule and that these intellectuals obtain, in return, a
share in the power and pelf extracted by the rulers from their deluded
subjects.
[[For a New Liberty:  The Libertarian Manifesto, Murray N. Rothbard,
Fox & Wilkes, 1973, 1978, p. 25]]

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions 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, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
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