A Palestinian woman walks past vandalized posters showing US President Barack Obama in the West Bank city of Ramallah, 15 March 2013
By Mark Steyn
I greatly enjoy the new Hollywood genre in which dysfunctional
American families fly to a foreign city and slaughter large numbers of
the inhabitants as a kind of bonding experience. Liam Neeson takes his
estranged wife and their teenage daughter for just such a vacation in
"Taken 2," in which the spectacular mountain of corpses in Istanbul
brings the family back together again and ends with them (spoiler alert)
enjoying a chocolate malt back at the soda fountain in California and
getting to know the daughter's new boyfriend. "Don't shoot this one,
Dad," she cautions. "I really like him." And they all have a good
chuckle over it. In "Die Hard 5" or whatever we're up to, Bruce Willis
and his estranged son fly to Moscow and do to the Russians what Neeson
does to the Turks and Albanians. I gather that in the forthcoming
"Finding Nemo 2," Marlin and Dory's marriage is going through a rocky
patch until Nemo is kidnapped by a Ukrainian sex cartel, and Marlin and
Dory swim up the Dnieper River and gun down every pimp in Kiev.
Alas, outside Hollywood, foreigners are somewhat less pliable than
the body count of Liam Neeson's and Bruce Willis' obliging extras would
suggest. The funniest line in "Taken 2" was Neeson's advice to his
daughter in an emergency: "Go to the U.S. Embassy. You'll be safe
there." It opened a couple of weeks after Benghazi.
There are drones, of course, which offer the consolations of
technological bad-assery, as if Liam Neeson could take out all the
Albanians from the X-Box in his basement. But don't worry. According to
Politico, at a recent meeting with Senate Democrats, President Obama
assured them that they had no need to worry about his awesome power to
rain down death from the skies because, as he put it, he's not Dick
Cheney.
Meanwhile, back at the GOP, Sen. Rand Paul is no Dick Cheney, either:
At CPAC this week, the narrow bounds of his smash-hit filibuster –
questioning drone assassinations of Americans in America – broadened
somewhat, not just to questioning drone assassinations of Americans
anywhere, nor to questioning drone assassinations of anyone, nor even to
questioning the "war on terror" or war in general, but to questioning
the very assumptions of American global order, starting with our
bankrolling of Mohamed Morsi in Cairo. The Egyptians send mobs to torch
the U.S. embassy, the Saudis wage ideological warfare against Western
civilization, the Turks call Israel a "crime against humanity" and
threaten a cultural and demographic takeover of Europe, the Pakistanis
are ramping up nuke production to sell to any loon in town – and those
are just our "allies." With friends like these, who needs foreign
policy? There are fewer and fewer takers for the burdens of global
superpower, and whoever wins the nomination in 2016 will be considerably
less Cheney and more Randy.
And, to be fair, even Dick Cheney isn't Dick Cheney, at least in the
sense that Dick Cheney isn't Darth Vader. After a decade of inconclusive
war, Americans are understandably receptive to the notion that it's
time to "come home." Thus, newly appointed Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel
faces, in the words of the Associated Press, "the jarring difficulties
of shutting down a war in a country still racked by violence." "Shutting
down"? Yes, the Defense Secretary is now doing to the Afghan war what
Romney's Bain Capital did to Midwestern factories. Its business model no
longer makes sense. Some personnel can be reassigned, but thousands of
EU nation-building consultants, cousins of Hamid Karzai and tribal
pederasts enjoying free Viagra from Washington (seriously) may have to
be laid off.
"Shutting down" Afghan wars can be a tricky business, as the British
discovered during their 1842 retreat from Kabul, when the locals offered
them "safe passage" and then proceeded to massacre all 4,500 troops
plus 12,000 wives, children and attendant locals, leaving only Dr.
William Brydon and his horse to make it through to Jalalabad. His mount
died upon arrival; Dr. Brydon lived to tell the tale, albeit missing
part of his skull, sheared off by a Pushtun tribesman.
No doubt things will go better this time. Two more Americans died
this week at the hands of one of their Afghan "allies," a man trained,
paid and armed by the United States. If you slaughter thousands, you can
still just about get our attention, as Mullah Omar discovered after
9/11. But the slow bleeding of two deaths here, three deaths there, week
after week after week takes a psychological toll, rotting out purpose
and strategy. So in Washington this will be a war we "shut down"; in
Kandahar and beyond, it will be a war we lost.
As one war "shuts down," are any others likely to open up? This week
Obama told Israel's Channel 2 TV that "we think it would take over a
year or so for Iran to actually develop a nuclear weapon." So Tehran,
fresh from playing the bad guys in Ben Affleck's Oscar-winning
blockbuster, is going nuclear? Hey, relax, says the president: "I
continue to keep all options on the table." And, every time he says
that, you get the vague feeling he continues to keep the table somewhere
in the basement. The best option would be if the Israelis just got on
with it, absolving everyone else from a tough decision and
simultaneously affording them the deliciously irresistible frisson of
denouncing the Zionists for their grossly disproportionate response.
More likely, Iran will be permitted to go nuclear – followed shortly
thereafter by Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and anyone else who dislikes
being conscripted under the Shia Persian nuclear umbrella. North Korea
and Pakistan both anticipate a lively export market.
Pakistan has a nominal per capita GDP of about $1,200, with North
Korea's barely detectable. By comparison, Sweden's is about $58,000 and
the Netherlands' about $50,000. But North Korea is a nuclear power, and
the Netherlands isn't, and has no plans to become one, and any party so
minded to propose otherwise would soon find itself out of power. The
assumption that developed nations will get richer under Washington's
defense welfare has been the central tenet of the American era. So now
the wealthiest countries in history cannot defend their own borders,
while economic basket-cases of one degree of derangement or another are
nuclear powers.
Perhaps this improbable division will hold. Perhaps the Axis of Crazy
will be content just to jostle among itself, leaving the Axis of Torpor
to fret about lowering the retirement age to 48 and mandatory
transgendered bathrooms and other pressing public policy priorities.
But, even under such an inherently unstable truce, the American position
and the wider global economy would deteriorate.
As the CPAC crowd suggested, there are takers on the right for the
Rand Paul position. There are many on the left for Obama's drone-alone
definition of great power. But there are ever fewer takers for a
money-no-object global hegemon that spends 46 percent of the world's
military budget and can't impress its will on a bunch of inbred
goatherds. A broker America needs to learn to do more with less, and to
rediscover the cold calculation of national interest rather than waging
war as the world's largest NGO. In dismissing Rand Paul as a "wacko
bird," John McCain and Lindsay Graham assume that the too-big-to-fail
status quo is forever. It's not; it's already over.
http://tinyurl.com/aeb98e5
No comments:
Post a Comment