Title: Message
Sirs,

America is about to go to war against Iraq. The reasons for this are varied, but they claim that the primary reason is to combat terrorism, and to restrain a dictator who has in the past, and who most certainly will again, use weapons of mass destruction. The need to enforce UN Resolutions, and to stop a brutal oppression is also mentioned.

Most nations and people in the world doubt this explanation. They question the veracity of the Americans, thinking that they are primarily concerned with oil. Those who are in doubt include the French, and the Germans, as well as most Europeans. Note that these same people have access to, and daily use, the very oil that they allege the Americans are lusting after. I haven't heard that any of them have stopped driving their cars.

When partners and friends start to question each other's veracity, partnerships are soon ended. Simply put, in a partnership you must recognize and accept that from time to time your partner sees the world differently from you. Having accepted each other's point of view, partners must work things out from there. Rather than this, we have witnessed the UN, and the NATO alliance in particular, replete with accusation and mistrust on both sides. The result can only seriously weaken both the UN and the NATO Alliance, whose days may now be numbered.

And so...why the letter? I am concerned about the insanity that is inherent in America's allies pretending to be able to tell the Americans who they are, and what they really think. Do we want to end our partnership with these people, and to watch as the Americans vacate the world stage, at least in terms of alliances and security agreements? Has it occurred to those who hate and question America that its involvement on that stage is voluntary? Why is it so hard to accept that they believe w hat they say?

But is this really a problem?

Please recall the history of the last century, and before. The challenge that the rest of the world has faced vis a vis the USA has always been keeping them engaged, as the deepest current in American foreign policy is not engagement, but isolation. A world which appears not only ungrateful - the American's spent how many hundreds of billions of dollars defending Western Europe? - but openly hostile to the USA, can only supply fodder for those in that country who want to return to that most powerful, and dangerous tradition. In light of what is often a disgusting hatred being directed at the USA ("the bastards!") by many of their so-called friends, it is likely that the possibility of a return to isolation, at least in part, is now being mentioned within the halls of power in America for the first time in sixty years. Such a retreat would, of course, take decades. But I have to wonder if the obvious inability of America to rely on some of its oldest allies, to whom it has been completely loyal for 60 years, hasn't already started this process.

And it gets worse. The Americans are about to run such high budget deficits that it may threaten their ability to maintain their old age pension system in coming years. In twenty or even ten years, when American law-makers must decide between defending Europe and funding world organizations, or providing pensions to their citizens, can there be any doubt as to what the outcome will be. The rally-cry is obvious..."Why are we defending wealthy Europeans and Japanese, while our own people suffe r?" Oh...I am still waiting for Europe's matching $15 billion to fight AIDS in Africa.

Also, we are at the start of an energy revolution. As hydrogen becomes a major source of energy, eventually relieving American reliance on Arab oil, why would they be in the Middle East at all? Those in Europe who are driving cars courtesy of the United States Navy, and who are also complaining vigorously about that same navy, may yet have an opportunity to try driving without oil. I can hear their battle-crys even now:

"We are powered by a correct philosophy!" Most crazy people are.

"We will rely on the UN!" I saw what that did for the people of Rwanda.

Oh, I might add, many in the world thought that the problem in Rwanda, and in the Balkans at the same time, was that the USA didn't get involved. This is the essence of my point.

Finally, given the obvious ingratitude being shown by many of their allies - by people America always thought it could count on as payback for decades of American sacrifice - why wouldn't they start to pull back from their alliances, and from associated international organizations, generally?

Isn't it obvious that Americans will start to think that these organizations do not serve the USA at all, and that they actually constitute a useless drain on the American taxpayer?

Won't some Americans start to think that reliance on world organizations is actually dangerous?

Didn't George Washington warn the people of the United States that Europeans couldn't be trusted or relied-upon?

Won't many in America start to again think that their first President was absolutely correct, and that the half-century American experiment with engagement was a terrible mistake?

Do you just despise the Americans? They are not perfect, but would you prefer the British, French, Russian, German, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Japanese, and Belgian empires that came before...empires which were themselves destroyed after WW2, in large part by an America which simply refused to support those countries in trying to rebuild them. The UN is not an option...just look at it. And world history is a history of empire. Are we so naive as to think that other empires would not be esta blished again without the USA in the way? What is the French Army doing in the Ivory Coast, right now, for example?

Like it or not, America is the glue that holds the world we know together. You don't like the idea of the USA fighting a war? Consider that without them being actively engaged in the world, the following wars would definitely break out:

1) China versus Taiwan and others as China asserts sovereignty over wide areas of the Pacific Ocean. The United States Navy is in the way at the moment, but the Chinese expect them to leave some day. This is the reason why the Chinese have started to build a deep-seas navy for the first time in 600 years;

2) North Korea versus South Korea, which war is guaranteed to break out once the 37,000 American soldiers there leave, and the North seeks to relieve its internal problems with external aggression;

3) eventually, Pakistan versus India, which could go nuclear. American trade, diplomacy, and other pressures are having a positive effect there. No one else has as much influence;

4) eventually, Germany versus France, and others. Sorry...Gaulic pride and German arrogance will definitely rise again without the USA there to unite them in their hatred and envy of all things American. Am I wrong in this? Consider that the European Union has barely returned Europe to where it was prior to WW1. How were Europeans doing between 1914 and 1918? The history of that continent is a history literally bathed in blood. The Union conquered nationalism? Take a look at the Balkans in t he early 1990's if you think nationalism is dead there. Europeans are one generation away from another pan-continental blood-letting...they always are. Only the United States Army has brought them 60 years of peace, and France will never be strong enough to contain Europe, no matter how highly they think of themselves;

5) Greece versus Turkey, with the flash-point being Cyprus. Right now they are only restrained as they are both in NATO, which Alliance would not exist without the USA:

6) Another Balkan war...you pick the participants;

7) Russia versus the Baltic states, and a range of others;

8) Israel versus various Arab States;

9) Other wars, especially in Central and South America.

Essentially, without America actively engaged in the world, we would witness a world at war....

And so, do you actually think the US Army, Navy and Airforce and Marines are causing more deaths by war in this world, or are they preventing more people from being killed in wars by being actively engaged in providing some balance on a fragile planet? If the answer isn't obvious to you, get ready to find out.

Personally, I think that it is already too late. I am now convinced that over the next twenty years we will witness an American retreat from its alliances and its support for world organizations, other than the WTO, as they come to realize that their 60-year experiment with engagement was itself the essence of the tragedy of September 11th. After their retreat, get ready for a return to a world circa 1914, but with even more "contestants". I'm not worried however...I'm sure the French will protect us...particularly if we live in Africa...

Arthur Heale
Ottawa





Reply via email to