|
LOS ANGELES --- The terrible tragedy that occurred last Sept. 11
left America not only with a sense of deep loss but a renewed sense
of direction and national mission that had been noticeably absent
in recent years. Certainly, for the administration of George W.
Bush, floundering from the outset for a North Star to which to align
its policy compass, the gruesome massacres did the job. Now, we
have seen the enemy -- and they are the terrorists. There's not
much dissent in the United States about that.
On one level,
the inadvertent benefit of what happened a year ago was immediate.
In Europe, America's allies began quarreling a little less and cooperating
with Washington a little more. Joint intelligence efforts were accelerated,
and old tensions were, for a while at least, set to the side. In
Asia, it quickly became clear that, with real enemies to worry about
-- Al Qaeda and the like -- Washington didn't have to ratchet up
problems to solve and improbable enmities to stare down, no time
for phantom bad guys of the Washington political opera.
One almost instant
such effect was the re-normalization of relations with China. Of
course, there were, and still are, serious tensions in the Sino-U.S.
relationship (Taiwan, human rights, etc.). But, rather quickly,
China became part of the solution instead of the problem when the
Bush administration realized -- its unilateralist gut notwithstanding
-- that America needed all the outside help it could get. And the
Jiang Zemin government played its hand well enough to stay on the
right side of the line in the sand being drawn by Sheriff Bush.
Before long,
however, the definition of the 9/11 problem began to grow enormously.
Iran, Iraq and North Korea were famously lumped together as the
Good, the Bad and the Ugly -- an evil trio if there ever was one.
But with all the ballooning rhetoric came a familiar Washington
phenomenon: mission creep. Having failed to capture or confirm as
officially dead Osama bin Laden, the Sheriff in Chief began drawing
his sights on a more visible "Axis of Terror" target:
Saddam Hussein.
On one level,
that's a good move. He's a genuinely bad guy; it's possible to imagine
that the amount of genuine sympathy for him worldwide, put on the
head of a pin, would leave enough room left for, say, the Three
Gorges Dam. But if a new war against Iraq ensues -- after the more
or less automatic approval of Congress and the rounding up of just
enough international support to blur the Bush Lonesome Cowboy image
-- the United States will be on a war footing for at least the duration
of Bush's first (only?) term.
And that would
seriously mar the image of an America that the world admires --
the America that not only won World War II but helped rebuild much
of the world after that triumph -- in Asia as well as Europe.
The point was
put well recently by China's Tang Shui Bei, now head of the Research
Center for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits, a major mainland
think tank. Ordinarily advice from China, which imprisons political
dissidents and acts in many ways not the American way, doesn't travel
well; but Tang -- the irrepressible former head of cross-strait
relations for the People's Republic of China -- spoke with obviously
sincere conviction of the U.S.' need to diversify its international
portfolio. With its rejection of the Kyoto Protocol and several
other well-meaning international treaties, America's "kinder,
gentler" side -- as Bush Sr. would have put it -- is at risk
of getting lost in the war-dance shuffle. One year after the World
Trade Center/Pentagon devastation, the United States must not compound
that tragedy by diluting its moral standing as a benign hegemon.
For this essential
national characteristic was key in obtaining the cooperation of
much of Asia in the effort against Al Qaeda. No country, including
China, could believe that U.S. designs on acquiring Central
Asian territory was the true motive, suggested Tang and his delegation
while visiting Los Angeles. But as the United States moves closer
to invading Iraq, it looks more like a martial Sparta and less like
a cultivated Athens, when ideally America should be striking a balance
between the two.
Even the West
Coast-based RAND Corp., a famous think tank with an image about
as dovish as the Pentagon's, raised this fear in its recent quarterly
review. A major essay by prominent experts proposed that America
take the lead in organizing a massive world health effort. Enemy
bombs are not our only mortal enemies. So, too, are epidemics that
cross international borders; and disease and poverty that germinate
the cultures breeding terrorism's foot soldiers. What the United
States needs is a something of the humanitarian order of a massive
first-class global health aid plan -- even more than it needs the
head of Saddam Hussein on the Pentagon's platter.
|