The International Reporting (and Life) Adventures of Vivian Salama

With Friends Like These…

Posted by vmsalama on November 16, 2007

An interesting column in today’s Washington Post from Charles Krauthammer.  While he definitely makes some legitimate points, my take on the matter is that these governments don’t represent public opinion when it comes to the issue of alliances with the United States, particulrly when it comes to US Foreign Policy.  Europeans are just as skeptical about many of the Bush Administration’s decisions as are Americans. 

Alliances In Ruins?

By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, November 16, 2007; A33

When the Democratic presidential candidates pause from beating Hillary with a stick, they join in unison to pronounce the Democratic pieties, chief among which is that George Bush has left our alliances in ruins. As Clinton puts it, we have “alienated our friends,” must “rebuild our alliances” and “restore our standing in the world.” That’s mild. The others describe Bush as having a scorched-earth foreign policy that has left us reviled and isolated in the world.

Like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, who insist that nothing of significance has changed in Iraq, the Democrats are living in what Bob Woodward would call a state of denial. Do they not notice anything?

France has a new president who is breaking not just with the anti-Americanism of the Chirac era but also with 50 years of Fifth Republic orthodoxy that defined French greatness as operating in counterpoise to America. Nicolas Sarkozy‘s trip last week to the United States was marked by a highly successful White House visit and a rousing speech to Congress in which he not only called America “the greatest nation in the world” (how many leaders of any country say that about another?) but also pledged solidarity with the United States on Afghanistan, Iran, Lebanon, the Middle East and nuclear nonproliferation. This just a few months after he sent his foreign minister to Iraq to signal an openness to cooperation and an end to Chirac’s reflexive obstructionism.

That’s France. In Germany, Gerhard Schroeder is long gone, voted out of office and into a cozy retirement as Putin’s concubine at Gazprom. His successor is the decidedly pro-American Angela Merkel, who concluded an unusually warm visit with Bush this week.

All this, beyond the ken of Democrats, is duly noted by new British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who in an interview with Sky News on Sunday remarked on “the great change that is taking place,” namely “that France and Germany and the European Union are also moving more closely with America.”

President George W. Bush and German Chancellor Angela Merkel shake hands after their news conference at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, November 10, 2007.

As for our other traditional alliances, relations with Australia are very close, and Canada has shown remarkable steadfastness in taking disproportionate casualties in supporting the NATO mission in Afghanistan. Eastern European nations, traditionally friendly, are taking considerable risks on behalf of their U.S. alliance — for example, cooperating with us on missile defense in the face of enormous Russian pressure. And ties with Japan have never been stronger, with Tokyo increasingly undertaking military and quasi-military obligations that it had forsworn for the past half-century.

So much for the disarray of our alliances.

The critics will say that all this is simply attributable to the rise of Russia and China causing old allies to turn back to us out of need.

So? I would even add that the looming prospect of a nuclear Iran has caused Arab states — Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, even Libya — to rally to us. All true. And it makes the point that the Bush critics have missed for years — that the strength of alliances is heavily dependent on the objective balance of international forces and has very little to do with the syntax of the U.S. president or the disdain in which he might be held by a country’s cultural elites.

It’s classic balance-of-power theory: Weaker nations turn to the great outside power to help them balance a rising regional threat. Allies are not sentimental about their associations. It is not a matter of affection but of need — and of the great power’s ability to deliver.

What’s changed in the past year? Bush’s dress and diction remain the same. But he did change generals — and counterinsurgency strategy — in Iraq. As a result, Iraq has gone from an apparently lost cause to a winnable one.

The rise of external threats to our allies has concentrated their minds on the need for the American connection. The revival of American fortunes in Iraq — and the diminished prospect of an American rout — have significantly increased the value of such a connection. This is particularly true among our moderate Arab allies who see us as their ultimate protection against an Iran-SyriaHezbollahHamas axis that openly threatens them all.

It’s always uncomfortable for a small power to rely on a hegemon. But a hegemon on the run is even worse. Alliances are always shifting. But one thing we can say with certainty: The event that will have more effect than any other on the strength of our alliances worldwide is not another Karen Hughes outreach to the Muslim world, not an ostentatious embrace of Kyoto or even the most abject embrace of internationalism from the podium of the United Nations. It is success or failure in Iraq.


One Response to “With Friends Like These…”

  1. A. said

    Mr. Charles K. lives in the past as he presumes the “us” is a fixed concept in eternity. That ain’t so. First of all, EU is now the top economic producer with GDP of 16.5 trillion Dollars vs. America’s 13.8 trillion, beofer the mortgage mess. Sencondly, the Middle Eastern (Sunni) regimes that are running to Uncle Sam only have one thing on their mind–survival, as is, and no regime change. They want to remove the bus stop sign for that “freedom” bus of Mr. Bush and, they did their best to keep the American army busy in Iraq over the past 4 years with their Sunni insurgent friends.
    Finally, we are back to the multi-polar world. In this game, each “magnet” will try to attract its own pals and friends. But I wonder if one really wants “friends” like Saudi Arabia (the exporter of Al Qaeda and 15 of the 9-11 terrorists) or Pakistan (a mess, no matter how you look at it) or Egypt’s Mubarrak (who is walking on thin ice). Will Mr. Sarkozy replace Tony Blair in the Atlantic Alliance? I think it will require setting up a Sixth Republic and junking away the political independence of France that is a long shot at best.
    The final question is whether America is going to start thinking about multilateralism again. Without it, it is just another hodgepodge of bilateral, but incoherent, arrangements.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: