04-08-2003, 10:29 PM
This is a half formed idea. During the Cold War, the US allied itself with any number of dictators to oppose the USSR. Politics make bedfellows of necessity. Hell, we allied with Stalin versus Hitler, and if one had seen all the "Red Baiting" that my Dad did in the 1930's, one might have been surprised.
So, Cold War ends, GHW Bush decides that the US can no longer stay in bed with, or simply accept, a major drug kingpin as an ally in Panama, for what ever reasons. Vaya con dios, Manuel.
During Cold War, in a non-cold war tangle, US supports Saddam a bit since he is the enemy of our enemy. Cold War over, and both Bush Presidents decide, for whatever reasons, that being in bed with a dictator simply won't cut it.
Hit the road pal.
Remember South Africa. Twenty years of trade sanctions by many nations, and a hell of a lot of international pressure, and things changed. (Better or worse depends on perspective)
OK, we never were in Bed with Kim Il Sung, or Kim Jong Il, so the model does not work with them like with Noriega, but maybe for the Chinese it will. Don't know.
I ask you all:
Is the US about to embark on a more activist role in trying to influence the petty tyrants of the world that they need to step down? Is all this bruhaha in Iraq a sign that the export of the Jeffersonian (and others) Experiment will once again recommence? Will policy aims be directed as often at the actual improvement of the people's lot, as it was in the 1950's and 1960's, the great years for UN expansion, as a concrete policy aim?
We have numbers on our side. The majority of nations have no-fooling representatives governments, of varying builds. The number of potential allies in a slow and steady campaign to put an end to fascism and dictatorship, hopefully through peaceful engagement and non violent influence from many sides, should be huge.
Given that all governments act in their own interests, at what point will true international momentum be built that can be sustained so that the Kings and Generals in many parts of the world accept the model of representative government, by and for the benefit of, the governed?
I realize that I may be reaching here, but a few bits I heard about some progressives in Iran working slowly on reform there got me to thinking:
What if this is the beginning of a trend? What if, should there be some modest mutlilateral success in Iraq over the next few years, momentum builds in the Mid East and Africa?
I realize that I am dreaming, but maybe it is a worthwhile dream. What if the policy of Constructive Engagement, professed since 1989, actually grows more, not less, pervasive?
So, Cold War ends, GHW Bush decides that the US can no longer stay in bed with, or simply accept, a major drug kingpin as an ally in Panama, for what ever reasons. Vaya con dios, Manuel.
During Cold War, in a non-cold war tangle, US supports Saddam a bit since he is the enemy of our enemy. Cold War over, and both Bush Presidents decide, for whatever reasons, that being in bed with a dictator simply won't cut it.
Hit the road pal.
Remember South Africa. Twenty years of trade sanctions by many nations, and a hell of a lot of international pressure, and things changed. (Better or worse depends on perspective)
OK, we never were in Bed with Kim Il Sung, or Kim Jong Il, so the model does not work with them like with Noriega, but maybe for the Chinese it will. Don't know.
I ask you all:
Is the US about to embark on a more activist role in trying to influence the petty tyrants of the world that they need to step down? Is all this bruhaha in Iraq a sign that the export of the Jeffersonian (and others) Experiment will once again recommence? Will policy aims be directed as often at the actual improvement of the people's lot, as it was in the 1950's and 1960's, the great years for UN expansion, as a concrete policy aim?
We have numbers on our side. The majority of nations have no-fooling representatives governments, of varying builds. The number of potential allies in a slow and steady campaign to put an end to fascism and dictatorship, hopefully through peaceful engagement and non violent influence from many sides, should be huge.
Given that all governments act in their own interests, at what point will true international momentum be built that can be sustained so that the Kings and Generals in many parts of the world accept the model of representative government, by and for the benefit of, the governed?
I realize that I may be reaching here, but a few bits I heard about some progressives in Iran working slowly on reform there got me to thinking:
What if this is the beginning of a trend? What if, should there be some modest mutlilateral success in Iraq over the next few years, momentum builds in the Mid East and Africa?
I realize that I am dreaming, but maybe it is a worthwhile dream. What if the policy of Constructive Engagement, professed since 1989, actually grows more, not less, pervasive?
Cry 'Havoc' and let slip the Men 'O War!
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete
In War, the outcome is never final. --Carl von Clausewitz--
Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
John 11:35 - consider why.
In Memory of Pete