| Should'a Stayed Home |
29 September 2003
|
Bush Bores at UN
Tuesday of last week saw a heavy downpour in New York and the arrival of President Bush, a combination that made the morning commute unbearable for many. Given what Mr. Bush said at the UN, he was less welcome than the rain. His speech was a melange of wooly-thinking, unconnected themes and unconditional defiance. Staying in Washington and snubbing the UN would have done less harm to American diplomacy.
"Diplomacy" to the Bush administration is what other nations would call "acquiescence". There is no give and take. As Mr. Bush said, "There is no neutral ground." Either a nation does as America says, or it has sided with the terrorists. There is no room for an ally who disagrees on tactics but accepts the overall strategy.
The remainder of the speech addressed nuclear proliferation, AIDS and sex-slavery and sex-tourism. By linking these to his Iraq policy, Mr. Bush managed to cheapen his words on Iraq while at the same time undermining comparatively solutions to the lesser but still important problems on which his administration could use some help. He merits some applause on his AIDS efforts but has assured himself no help nor any effectiveness with his UN appearance.
The naive pundits believed that Mr. Bush would come to New York and wave an olive branch at the UN (and especially at the French and Germans). They do not understand the administration's approach to the international community. The White House firmly believes that America can go it alone, and that the rest of the world should help on American terms because America is in the right. Until America's approach changes, the status quo post bellum will continue as is. And that won't change without a new person sitting in the Oval Office.
Home