3 posts tagged “bush doctrine”
Jeff Jacoby writes of the disappointing Bush. With the Secretary of State as the voice piece, President Bush is abandoning a principle of the Bush Doctrine pertaining to terrorism.
Regardless of constant terrorism by Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Aksa Brigade and other Islamofascist terrorists that call themselves Palestinians; President Bush is determined to create a sovereign nation called Palestine.
National Interests drive domestic and foreign policies of all nations. What do you think a Palestinian State’s primary National Interest would be?
If you thought that National Interest was to live in perpetual peace with Israel cooperating with the Israeli economy to strengthen the infrastructure of a novice Palestinian State, you would be an idiot.
The National Interest of a Palestinian State will be the same as the prime directive of the Arab terrorists since the Arab League set up the refugees they created as a stateless people: none other than the complete and utter destruction of Israel and the Jews that live in the Land of Israel.
And guess what? Part of the Bush dhimmitude to Arab wishes is for Israel to recede to the vulnerable borders that existed between Israel’s creation in 1948 through 1967 prior to one of the Arab invasions to drive the Jews into the sea. The penalty for that Arab invasion was the complete union of Jerusalem under Israeli authority and the acquisition of land Biblically part of Israel and Judaism.
That border recession is like stamping a big sign on an Israeli map that says, “INVADE ME.”
Evidently the Bush Administration is willing to sacrifice Israeli security to drum up Arab friends to stand with him of the true threat of rogue Iranian militancy not to mention Iran being the biggest supporter of transnational terrorist organizations committed to a Jewish holocaust.
So you see President Bush is playing a brinksmanship game between Arabs and Iranians gambling on checking Iran and offering a Palestinian State as a gift for Arab help to check Iran. I am guessing the thinking is that Iran is the current threat to the flow of oil thus affecting our National Interests so President Bush is operating in the NOW of what is left of his term of Office and let the next President be responsible for the existence of Israel.
The problem with that thinking there is a huge chance that Appeasement minded Democrats may win the Presidency in 2008 and allow Israel to be dissolved by American inaction. Did I say “dissolved?” I meant butchered.
The butchering lay in that Bush has been selling weapons to Arabs that has nearly erased Israel’s qualitative military edge (QME) in superior weapons to potential hostile neighbors.
You can think of the QME in this way. Israel had such a difficult time in punishing Hezbollah for missile launches and soldier kidnapping, that many Middle Eastern nations perceived the first Arab victory and the first Israeli loss in battle since their 1948 Statehood. This was accomplished with better training thanks to Iran more than superior weapons.
Now check this out! America has been selling high tech weaponry to perceived American Arab friends Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt. The Saudi’s have never formerly recognized Israel as State. Although Jordan and Egypt have diplomatic relations with Israel they have been involved in every major invasion of Israel since 1948. These Arab nations have benefitted from American training and high tech weapons.
What do you think will happen if Bush succeeds in creating a Palestinian State with Arab allies that have American military training and American high tech weapons?
Robert McMahon writing for the Council on Foreign Relations concludes in a recent article that the Bush Administration is modifying the Bush Doctrine. To act preemptively in international crisis is still stalwart; however the concept of exporting democratic principles is being modified. Not all cultures are amenable to receive Western style democracy when the culture is theocratic and anti-Western culturally.
This is the difficulty that has slowed American progress in Iraq (combined with utilizing political correctness as a viable option to schmooze the indigenous citizens). Thus the experience in Iraq and the current crisis existing in Pakistan – Islamists versus Mohammedan moderates (if there is such a thing) is effecting a modification of the Bush Doctrine.
That modification is a resurgence of Political Realism to a certain degree within the Bush Doctrine. Thus preemptive action to secure America’s National Interests still remains; however applying Political Realism as a measured viability in transforming a repressive regime into the infrastructure of democratic principles must weigh in to America’s National Interests. If democratic principles are rejected on a grass roots level of a culture in a nation then Political Realism options to ensure American National Interests and Security must be utilized.
The old adage power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely is a truism under a one man rule even if its initial inception was benevolent. In a Western Democratic Representative government that possesses immense power, the power is managed collectively via voters choosing elected officials to manage the power. The corruption aspect is more difficult to corrupt power when the infrastructure has the checks and balances of democratic principles.
Nonetheless America is a mega-super power globally which means there are regional mere super power nations that do not wish to deal with American hegemony. The principle super powers that attempt to derail American National Interests for whatever reasoned regional conflict with another National Interest are Russia, China and remarkably the collective of the European Union.
Regardless of accusations of Third World nations and Leftist influences of the mere super powers, American National Interests does not include imperialism. Imperialism implies conquest to rule foreign nations. America has never had an interest in neo-colonial imperialism since the twentieth century and very little of that thinking prior to the twentieth century. The closest America came to imperialism was the concept of Manifest Destiny, which acquired land from the east coast toward the west coast at the expense of Native Americans and Mexico.
The National Interests are the end goals of the USA. US strength gives the appearance of a global hegemony of American Empire. Since the USA has no interest in ruling other lands that is an erroneous perception. The USA has a National Interest in maintaining mega-power to meet outside security threats and the National Interest of maintaining global prosperity that affects the economy of America and the pursuit of happiness for American citizens.
The Bush Doctrine meets the parameters of America’s current National Interests. The use of preemptive military action that rocks the global boat and the exporting of an infrastructure of democratic principles which promote global coexistence are the central points of the Bush Doctrine.
Communism has been derailed as a repressive government in which democratic principles have been inculcated into a nation’s culture. That is the legacy of the Reagan Administration.
There is a new ideology threatening global peace and affecting the National Interests of America. Well new in the sense of twenty-first century, actually the ideology has been around since the seventh century. That is the terrorist principles of Theo-political Islamism or Islamofascism. Islamofascism is the fringe interpretation and enforcement of the Scriptures and Traditions related to the founder of Mohammedanism (Islam) – Mohammed. Mohammed was a cruel Arab that utilized delusional visions or manmade ideology in the wrappings of religion to carve out an empire and maintain the empire by forcing the conquered to Mohammedanism or become a sub-human in submission to the Theo-political ideology or die. This effectively maintained a platform to control large amounts of land providing wealth to the ruling elites that followed Mohammed’s demise. In Mohammedan lands this system is maintained to this day which has indoctrinated the Mohammedan follower of hateful intolerance of non-Mohammedans and cruel barbaric punishment to Mohammedans that break the cultic code. This harshness is particularly devastating toward women who do not even realize the cruelty until they become the victims breaking the medieval code (Sharia Law) wittingly or unwittingly.
Two things threaten global peace and thus include American National Interests:
1. The largest deposits of OIL that are extracted to be refined are in the Mohammedan controlled Middle East. Currently oil is the black gold energy source that powers the majority of what people use that need energy. The primary examples are automobiles, jets and military vehicles. Without refined oil the global economy could sink into a depression reminiscent of the Great Depression of the 1930’s. Western European nations and China are highly dependent on this oil. The politics of oil has influenced democratic Europeans to support Islamist causes. China has developed a huge market in military arms for oil with Middle Eastern nations; particularly rogue Islamofascist nations as Iran and Syria who in turn supply Islamofascist transnational terrorists as al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah and more.
2. The second threat on American National Interests is the growing influence of Islamist-American organizations that receive and send funding to foreign Islamist terrorists or supporters of terrorism (such as Saudi Arabian Wahhabism and Egyptian based Muslim Brotherhood). Currently this is a larger threat in Western Europe where secular humanism has created a huge vacuum in spiritual matters and the large populations of Mohammedans are actually filling that vacuum rather than the traditional Christian Church (Catholic or Protestant).In America there seems to be a union of religious Islamism and non-religious Secular Humanist with the mutual goal of obliterating the foundations and morality of Christianity. Islamist-Americans and foreign Islamists are infiltrating American Government and bureaucracy to attain sensitive information and deliver it to Islamist terrorist enemies of America.
Here are some interesting thoughts from Ted Belman of Israpundit on the insights of one of Rudy Giuliani’s foreign policy advisors – Norman Podhoretz.
JRH 11/22/07
****************************
Podhoretz, like Bush, is staying the course.
By Ted Belman
November 10, 2007
Ever since being introduced to Commentary Magazine in the sixties I have been an avid reader of Commentary and fan of Norman Podhoretz. Tonight I attended a lecture given by him.
You may recall he was responsible for preparing the intellectual groundwork that enabled Ronald Reagan to win the Whitehouse. He led the battle against Oslo. Unfortunately he also supported the disengagement from Gaza.
So where is he at now aside from being appointed by Giuliani as policy advisor?
1. He believes that history will vindicate Bush much as it did Harry Truman. Truman had to fight Communism and developed the doctrine of containment. He had many detractors from such policy and lost the elections to Eisenhower who was vocally against containment but once in office, made no changes to the policy. Similarly, Podhoretz believes that the Bush Doctrine, which he identified as pre-emption militarily and democratization politically, will be continued by the next administration be it Democrat or Republican.
2. He had great praise for the American soldiers and their patriotism. He suggests that these young people are reflective of the American heartland from which they came. They and the heartland have the right stuff. He reminded us that a NY Times writer remarked, after Nixon won office much to the consternation of pundits, “I don’t know anyone who voted for him”. Hopefully the Democrats today are similarly out of touch.
3. He is very hard on Condi. He says she used to be a realist in foreign policy having been mentored by Scowcroft. Then, when she came over to the Whitehouse, she abandonned (sic) such thinking. During Bush’s first year in office, he had to endure a State Department and CIA which were openly hostile to his policies that it was their duty to uphold. He sent Condi there to whip it into line. Unfortunately it whipped her into line. Bush has absolutely no confidence that anything will come of Condi’s efforts. Now is just not the time to expect progress. He is letting her run with it expecting her and her policies to crash and burn taking the realists down with them. For him that would be a good thing. It would restore the Bush Doctrine.
4. Olmert, he says is, partly to blame because he is too eager for for (sic) a settlement. Its not just American pressure.
5. He recently wrote an article that the only thing worse than bombing Iran is not bombing Iran. He expects Bush to order an air assault before he leaves office.
5. (sic) Everyone believed that Hussein was developing WMD’s. While this was one of the reason’s (sic) for invading Iran (sic) [should read Iraq], the main reason was to start the process of democratization as a means of transforming the ME. Podhoretz and Bush both believe in the Bush doctrine.
6. He did not get a chance to comment on Bush’s relationship with the Saudis but he did comment that neither Saudi Arabia or China would bring the US down, economically, because they too would suffer.
