Posted by Eugene Volokh:
More from Max Boot:
Another [1]interesting column -- don't know if it's right, but it's
definitely worth reading. Here's an excerpt:
One of John F. Kerry's most damning accusations against President
Bush is that he has made America a global pariah, thereby
undercutting the international cooperation we need to win the war
on terrorism. . . . Opinion polls show that a large number of
Americans have bought this argument. . . .
It's easy to see why so many people would come to this conclusion,
since surveys do show that U.S. popularity has declined in many
countries during the past four years. Obviously it's better, all
things being equal, to be liked than disliked. Kerry has a point
when he accuses the Bush administration of squandering some
opportunities to garner support abroad. The mishandling of Turkey
before the Iraq war is a case in point.
Where Kerry is dead wrong, demonstrably wrong, is in suggesting
that this unpopularity is taking a heavy toll on America's efforts
to win the war on terrorism. Actually, by all indications, the
United States is now getting significantly more cooperation in
fighting terrorists than it ever did in the balmy days of Bill
Clinton, who did all the sweet multilateral things that Kerry
endorses -- trying to broker an Israeli-Palestinian accord, signing
the Kyoto global warming treaty, not offending "Old Europe" or
threatening the power of Middle Eastern autocrats. . . .
What's going on here? Why are countries from Pakistan to Portugal
doing so much to help the United States if George W. Bush has
purportedly done so much to alienate them? Chalk it up to pure
self-interest. Many nations have come to realize, as they never did
in the past, that Islamist terrorists pose a mortal threat to them.
. . .
There was no question that the United States was better liked
abroad in the 1990s, at least if public opinion surveys are to be
believed, but was it more respected? When the Clinton
administration went privately to Middle Eastern countries seeking
cooperation against terrorism, it sometimes got significant help --
the Jordanians, for instance, helped bust up the 2000 millennium
plot. . . . But often the Clinton administration got the cold
shoulder from governments that were wary of a fickle America that
would likely flee at the first sign of adversity . . . . Pakistan
and Saudi Arabia were actively aiding the Taliban and perhaps even
al Qaeda before 9/11 because they were more scared of alienating
Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar than Bill Clinton. Bush's steely
response to the 9/11 attacks helped change the calculus within
these wavering states: They became more wary of trifling with the
gunslinger in the White House than with his smooth-talking
predecessor. . . .
In cataloguing the consequences of American unpopularity abroad,
Democrats suggest that Bush is driving more recruits into al
Qaeda's arms. This is a real possibility, but it is not a claim
that can be verified or falsified, since there is no roll call of
terrorists. All we can say for sure is that al Qaeda had no trouble
recruiting young Muslims to attack U.S. targets in the 1990s even
as Bill Clinton was doing everything possible to make America more
popular. . . .
No doubt the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq have driven some
Islamic zealots over the edge and led them to pick up a
rocket-propelled grenade or a homemade bomb. Certainly some Afghans
and Iraqis have opportunities they never had before to attack U.S.
soldiers, if not U.S. civilians. But it's also true that the
international forces opposing al Qaeda have gotten immeasurably
stronger during the Bush administration . . . .
(For many more details, see the [2]column.)
References
1.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Protected/Articles/000/000/004/518ogbwe.asp?ZoomFont=YES
2.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Protected/Articles/000/000/004/518ogbwe.asp?ZoomFont=YES
_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://highsorcery.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
