Mr. Bush Goes to Europe BY: Boris Ryvkin
"Oh, no, no, no! Je deteste les Etas-Unis!"
In what has been termed by the mainstream media as the “charm offensive,” President Bush visited NATO and EU leaders in Brussels, and held private meetings with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, French President Jacques Chirac, and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Bush's aimed to mend some fences that were roughly split as a result of America’s War on Terror. In a press conference with the head of NATO, Bush was particularly happy that all twenty-six members of the organization voted unanimously to support funding troop training camps in Iraq.
Iraq, of course, was not the only thing on the menus during the President’s trip. Iran, China, the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, America’s lack of support for the Kyoto Treaty, and Syria’s occupation of Lebanon caused fiery debate from each of the parties involved. While some credit Bush for actually bothering to go to Europe and meat our lethargic “allies,” many are still suspicious of the President’s goodwill. In a nationwide poll in Germany, for instance, 73% of the population still said that Bush’s visit did nothing to change their minds about his foreign policy. Of course, you cannot expect a bunch of photo-ops and talking behind closed doors to change the entire mindset overnight. Still, this trip does show a renewed interest on the President’s part to inform our “allies” that if they do not get engaged in fighting the War on Terror and strengthening democracy abroad, everyone will lose.
President Bush Greets the Evil Emperor...eh...Vladimir Putin
Bush stressed that NATO needed to be “reformed to fit the 21st century.” The President still maintained that NATO should be the main focal point of operations in handling trouble spots around the world, particularly in Asia and the Middle East. One major conflict arose when Germany and France, both staunch opponents of America’s bold, new international vision, have put forth arguments as to why NATO is no longer suited to handle the complex socioeconomic problems affecting the world’s troubled regions. Rather, Nato was relic of the Cold War that should give more power to the EU and the UN. Such a situation would not be to the benefit of the United States.
The move gives further credence to the hypothesis that the French and the Germans are attempting to turn the EU, and to a similar extent the UN, into independent agencies to counter American influence and stifle success in our national security strategy. The Euro has traded its highest value against a steadily falling dollar just last week, and despite the fact that the European powers spend far less of their GDP on military production, the potential for such production is still very real. Still, given our current situation, it would seem prudent to continue following the dictum, “the US can’t do anything without Europe, and Europe can’t do anything without the US.” Clearly, America and its European colleagues are working at somewhat counter-purposes.
In a private dinner with French leader Chirac, the President said such warm things as “every time I meet with Jacques, he's got good advice,” and “I look forward to listening to you.” Chirac, looking somewhat confused as always, commented that France and the US have “shared values and ideals,” and that we worked for 200 years to preserve them. He then stated the most problematic line of the day, “on weapons of mass destruction and terrorism, we have the same approach.” Huh! That just made me leap out of my seat, if it was tall enough to leap out of in the first place. We are talking about the same guy who, after being presented with all of Saddam Hussein’s crimes, from having intelligence links to Al-Qaeda to sponsoring Palestinian terrorist attacks to violating 17 UN resolutions, still acted in concert with the dictator against any attempts to weaken, or much less eliminate, his power. This is the same man who called Yassir Arafat a “man of courage and conviction,” and whose links to the Oil-for-Food scandal have since been known to be severe. Clearly admitting the French and the US have the same approach in winning the war on terror is farfetched to say the least. The only thing Bush and Chirac did see eye to eye on, if Chirac has eyes that could see clearly at all at this point, is the Syrian occupation of Lebanon . Both leaders called for Syria to immediately withdraw all its forces from the area and to comply with international demands to crack down on terrorism.
President Bush Waves with German Chancellor Schroeder
Bush next went to Mainz, Germany, to meet with German Chancellor Schroeder. The two did not focus on Iraq so much as the growing threat from Iran. They seemed to have a more amiable meeting than the one Bush had with Chirac, and the President reiterated that “it's vital that the Iranians hear the world speak with one voice that they shouldn't have a nuclear weapon.” Schroeder said that, “Iran should say no to any kind of nuclear weapon.” A German ambassador to the US said that the meeting represented the “most far-reaching” attempt to work out a common EU-US Iran strategy.
Bush finished his trip by going to Slovakia and meeting with the former KGB money racketeer, now Russian President, Vladimir Putin. Despite the photo-op, Putin basically told Bush to go his own way on the question of democracy. Anyone who still believes Putin is a true ally of the US is just not thinking clearly. From his sponsoring of weapons sales to Syria and Iran, support for Palestinian terrorism, and centralization of Russia’s power structure, Putin has proven that his own agenda is the only that concerns him. Whereas Chirac and Schroeder are maneuvering to counter-balance the US abroad, Putin is exploiting his country’s own national security problems and America’s controversial policies for his own personal benefit and that of his closest cronies. Continuing to ignore these threats with or without the “charm offensive” must not be tolerated.
Contact the author: bryvkin@republicanvoices.org