|
The following two columns indicate that the Bush administration
is advancing more difficulties in SE Asia by its lack of follow-up, convincing
allies and interested parties that we won’t back up our agreements and
promises. Of course, some say we’ve had this reputation far longer than Bush
has been in office; however, this is a dangerous reputation to have at the very
moment when we are proposing radical change and demanding cooperation from
longtime allies while catering to new strategic “friends”. Remember that Kissinger wrote in his Op-Ed piece about Iraq
intervention that it would be critical for the US to prevent other nations,
India as a prime example, from assuming the same preemptive strike position
that the US under Bush-Cheney is proposing for itself. How do you say “Do as I say, not as I
do” in any of the Indian dialects? Hoaglund: The Saudis must save themselves @ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47247-2002Aug21.html Excerpt: “Iraq's
Baathist dictatorship is a dying if still highly dangerous Nazi-like remnant of
Arab socialist nationalism. Stuck
in the Nasser era, the regime has enslaved its talented and resourceful people
and holds them in a time warp. In
Iran, Ayatollah Khomeini's Islamic revolution has run its course and must now
bend or break as a profoundly disaffected population demands change. And Saudi Arabia's royals can no longer
treat their country and its oil wealth as their private plaything and
piggybank. They can no longer
ignore the vast problems their now unworkable succession system and social
codes produce for them and the world. Saudi Arabia can still
be saved -- not by America's armed forces but by its own people and rulers. But the Saudis do not have even a minute
to waste. It is rare in world
politics to get a second chance to fix a mistake as big as losing a decade. Saudi Arabia must seize a last
opportunity for salvation.” Hoaglund: Deadly Minuet @ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47247-2002Aug21.html Excerpt: “But it is not only the Pakistani
military ruler's rhetoric that points toward a new crisis in the making. Discussions with influential Indian
opinion-makers and analysts at an Aspen Strategy Group meeting in Colorado this
month suggest that the attitude of India's political and military leaders has
changed since June on two points that make war more likely. First, India's leaders
are letting it be known in New Delhi that they cannot afford to back down in
the face of Pakistan's open threats to use nuclear weapons to counter India's
overwhelming conventional superiority. India was, in their view at least, the victim of history's
biggest nuclear bluff last spring. To let Musharraf continue to practice
brinksmanship and nuclear deterrence would paralyze Indian strategy and
discredit these leaders with their own electorate. Second,
U.S. diplomatic intervention is now a devalued tool in Indian eyes. The promise that Musharraf made to
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage in June to end cross-border
terrorism in India and Kashmir "permanently" has not been carried out
by anyone's measure, and the United States has not forcefully pressed Musharraf
to keep his word.” I guess the other question here is while
rattling sabers in their direction, how to keep Saudi investors in the US at a
time when the US economy needs all the foreign investors it can get? According
to the article Keith posted recently, “According to government figures, foreigners put $124
billion into the US last year, down from $301 billion in 2000…Economists say
the reluctance of wealthy outsiders to expand their business interests in America
is a major threat to the world's largest economy. Saudi investors have $750 billion in the US. A mass walkout
would seriously impede the US's attempts to pull away from recession.” Bush
seems to be very good at putting himself between a rock and a hard place, as
they say. - Karen |
