It has been a good few weeks for advocates of arguments for real politische – a foreign policy catering to short term American advantage. The terrorist Hamas’ victory in Palestinian elections caps the list; stick through thick and thin with a corrupt, authoritarian Arafatish Fatah, the best you could hope for, would have been their spiel.
From Tokyo to Rabat, momentarily advantage is with the enemies of political freedom and market economy.
In Japan, a flashy [and apparently corrupt] advocate of the new capitalism has given his patron, Prime Minister Koizumi, a black eye on the eve of his departure from leadership of Japan’s — pardon the expression but one cannot resist – neoconservative effort to turn its back on the long history of “administrative guidance”..
In Thailand, billionaire Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra is selling short, flogging his electronics empire to Singapore’s national fund [managed by that prime minister’s wife]. A little late in the day, Thaksin hopes to shed his image of wheelerdealering at the public trough and his disrespect of sacrosanct King Phumipon Aduldej. But he introduces instability into the economy, still hung over from the 1997-98 East Asia Financial Crisis.
In Sri Lanka, a rabid Singhalese chauvinist was thrown up by elections – aided and abetted by the thuggish Tamil Tigers [who invented modern suicide bombing] — further testing a fragile armistice. That could bring on new savagery in a country with abundant resources and an enterprising population. It could also threaten India whose 60 million Tamils joined in a breakaway country is the real target of the Tigers.
India, itself, has a weak coalition government, all things to all people, including sidling up to Washington. In foreign policy, it pines for the old Soviet alliance. That costs the taxpayer billions poured into antiquated Russian weaponry while diddling with a domestic Maoist insurgency in 13 states and breakaway Northeast movements within spitting distance of growing Chinese power in Tibet. Its trumpeted economic liberalization – turning its back on 35 years of Soviet-style planning – is hobbled by Communist Parties, a necessary parliamentary crutch, and a repeat of discredited “poverty” programs
Pakistan, under a military dictatorship cloaking itself in pseudo-parliamentary trimmings and a relatively free press, is coming under increasing pressure to expand the electoral process and civilianize Pres. Gen,. Musharraf. But standing in the wings are some of the world’s most corrupt politicians – and antediluvian feudal tribal leaders now creating havoc in Baluchistan. [Former President Bhutto has been indicted in a Swiss court on several counts of moneylaundering, etc., with …the same firm for which Secretary Anan’s son worked in the Oil for Food Iraq thievery.] These same politicians presided over proliferation of nuclear weapons under Pakistan’s Dr. Khan, an important member of the conspiracy to arm Iran with nukes. Yet no government is more critical to Washington’s anti-terror strategies.
Algeria, where the issue of “democracy”and Islamofascism was first joined, is recovering from a decade of horrendous violence brought on by repression of a victory by a religiously-motivated party. As in Palestine, the electorate in 1992 voted for reform against corrupt and increasingly authoritarian leaders. But with of growing numbers of Moroccan immigrants involved in European terrorism, is a similar fate not awaiting Algeria’s neighbor, where traditional government is unable to provide jobs?
The realists, the Kissinger school of American diplomacy, would argue at this point direct U.S. interest must dictate Washington’s decision-making. To try such lofty experiments as “nation building” – with the rather sorry American record from Haiti to Vietnam despite the post-WWII successes of restoring Germany and Japan – is to tempt the devil.
It’s not an argument with an answer. Secretary of State Rice struggled mightily on CNN International in the wake of the Palestinian debacle. But about all she could do was to remind listeners how much better the Middle East [and East Asia] is than it had been at other times.
Ultimately we are down to articles of faith. Tempered [and ah! that is the snag!] U.S. support of decency among our foreign collaborators has to be an American touchstone. [How many arguments there were about how corruption was not the issue in Soeharto’s Indonesia and how long it is taking to dig out of that hole!]
Pres. Bush, from 9/11 has repeatedly warned, in the fine print, the war against terrorism through remaking the societies of the Mideast would be a long haul. Perhaps we are finding out just how long, as we did midway during the Cold War. But it’s important to remember that struggle was probably attenuated because of the advocacy by the realists of the inevitability of the survival of the Soviets and thus their program for “détente”, a pause in our efforts at confrontation.
To call on that old cliché, but one that rings true, the U.S. ethos from the inception of the Republic has been drawn as “the city on the Hill”. Ronald Reagan was right, both morally — and tactically as events proved — to pick up the challenge again and call the Soviets “an evil empire” and act on it.
To do less, even at this moment of deep crisis, would be to deny our birthright and ultimately to imperil our security.
Sol W. Sanders, (solsanders@cox.net),
is an Asian specialist with more than 25 years in the region, and a former correspondent
for Business Week, U.S. News & World Report and United Press International.
He writes weekly for World Tribune.com and East-Asia-Intel.com.
