-Caveat Lector-
From
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/world/2001/0929/wor4.htm
}}}>Begin
Saturday, September 29, 2001
Looking over Powell's
shoulder with unease
Wooing Pakistan has not been easy. But of all the regional powers it
was the most crucial strategically and politically in the battle that
is coming. And yet its membership of the US's informal alliance is
both a strength and, importantly, a constraint, a price that some in
the US would prefer not to pay.
The US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, had reiterated the Bush
formula to the country's leader Gen Pervez Musharraf - you have to
decide whether you are with us or against us.
Powell's deputy and best friend, Richard Armitage, was even blunter
in a session with Mahmoud Ahmed, the head of Pakistani intelligence.
When Ahmed begun to demur that "much history" was involved in any
Pakistani decision to go after Osama bin Laden, Armitage leapt up
from his desk, growling, "History starts today".
Convinced that the US can succeed in this new form of war only if it wins hearts and
minds in the world community, and particularly in the Middle East, the building of the
alliance is for Powell the central strategic impe
rative, one that must, if necessary, take precedence over dreams of a great war
against all the harbourers of terrorism.
To date Powell, no pacifist, it should be emphasised, has had his way. President Bush
has listened and been patient. But there has been a growing clamour from within and
around the Administration, and from the ranks of ne
o-conservative columnists close to the Administration's hard right, against what is
seen as Powell's appeasing tactics. Many have never forgiven him for arguing that the
Gulf War should end with the retaking of Kuwait and
regard the overthrow of Saddam Hussein as unfinished business. Business that should
be finished now.
In essence the choices are stark, as John Diamond of the Chicago Tribune puts it, "one
involving making as many friends as possible, the other destroying as many enemies as
possible".
Or, put another way, the choice is between a commitment to multilateralism as a policy
and method, or to unilateralism, the raw assertion of US power.
Within the Administration Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy Secretary of Defence, has been
the most vocal opponent of the Powell desire to limit the campaign initially to
Afghanistan. Long an advocate of overthrowing Saddam, he
has said publicly the US should be "ending states who sponsor terrorism".
His comment brought an icy response from Powell four days later: "I think ending
terrorism is where I would like to leave it, and let Mr Wolfowitz speak for himself,"
he said.
But the latter is not on his own. His boss, Don Rumsfeld, the Vice-President, Dick
Cheney, and the latter's chief of staff, Lewis Libby, are all seen as hawks on the
issue.
Within days of the attack, a meeting of the Pentagon's Defence Policy Board (DPB), a
prestigious advisory group dominated by neo-conservatives, was reportedly
overwhelmingly in favour of immediately expanding the military
options aimed at Iraq that were already under active consideration.
"This isn't the time to cut clever political deals that result in halfway measures in
the war against terrorism," said Kim Holmes, a member of the DPB and of the right-wing
Heritage Foundation, a Washington public policy
centre. "If the price is too high, the President should tell would-be allies that
Americans will get the job done without them."
Holmes said the administration was in danger of building "an unwieldy coalition of
military forces that gives everybody a seat at the decision table."
Another shot across the Powell bow has come in an "Open Letter" co-signed by 41
foreign-policy scholars, including the chairman of the DPB, Richard Perle, another of
its members, William Bennett, the former UN ambassador
Jeanne Kirkpatrick, the publisher of the Weekly Standard, William Kristol, and the
editor in chief of the liberal New Republic, Martin Peretz, essentially the entire
neo-conservative establishment.
They say that to retain their support Bush must target Hezbollah for destruction, and
retaliate against Syria and Iran if they refuse to cut all ties to the group. He must
also move militarily to overthrow Iraq's Saddam H
ussein. Failure to attack Iraq, they warn "will constitute an early and perhaps
decisive surrender in the war on international terrorism".
Bennett wants Congress to declare war on "militant Islam" and "overwhelming force"
used on state sponsors of terror such as Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Iran and even
China.
In the media the pundits, defence experts, and the likes of Rush Limbaugh, have let
rip, accusing Powell not merely of being misguided, but disloyal to the President and
suggesting cowardice - "When advocates of merely mi
nor objectives are praised as 'cooler heads', the pertinent attribute may be cold
feet," columnist George Will sneered last week.
Kristol, who also took pot shots at Powell during the China spy-plane crisis, reminded
Washington Post readers of Powell's Gulf War record and claimed that "Since his speech
to Congress last Thursday, virtually every majo
r political figure has gone out of his way to support the President. Except for his
Secretary of State. On the Sunday talk shows, Colin Powell revised or modified many of
his boss's remarks.
"What's going on here? Powell is desperate to focus our effort on bin Laden's
al-Qaeda. Holding the Taliban responsible would raise questions about the role of
governments in supporting terror, and might suggest a general
policy of régime change where possible. Powell is hostile to any such policy, in part
because such a policy might require a broader military engagement . . .
Or take Ann Coulter of the National Review: "We know who the homicidal maniacs are .
. . We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to
Christianity."
The Wall Street Journal editorialised bluntly. "Mark us down for supporting a major
military strike, not just in Afghanistan in pursuit of Osama bin Laden, but if need be
against terrorist enclaves in a host of countries.
"
"We recognise that taking the war to Iraq won't be easy, but the prospect that he
might use nuclear, biological or chemical weapons in the future should concentrate the
national mind."
For the neo-conservative right the tragedy of September 11th has become an opportunity
to settle old scores and reassert America's global power, to shake off the wimpish
centrists whose compromising is seen as jeopardisin
g their great Reaganite dream of finally defeating the renascent evil empire.
As Ireland's Minister for Foreign Affairs, Brian Cowen, admitted on his way through
here this week, America's European allies, who have lived with and absorbed the
complexity of the challenge of reconciling historic enemi
es, find Powell reassuring as they prepare for the inevitability of
military conflict. They look over his shoulder with some unease.
© 2001 ireland.com
End<{{{
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe
simply because it has been handed down for many generations. Do not
believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do
not believe in anything simply because it is written in Holy Scriptures. Do not
believe in anything merely on the authority of Teachers, elders or wise men.
Believe only after careful observation and analysis, when you find that it
agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all.
Then accept it and live up to it."
The Buddha on Belief, from the Kalama Sutta
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
A merely fallen enemy may rise again, but the reconciled
one is truly vanquished. -Johann Christoph Schiller,
German Writer (1759-1805)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that
prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Everyone has the right...to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless
of frontiers."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will
teach you to keep your mouth shut."
--- Ernest Hemingway
<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
