America Looks For Advice
It’s not that long ago that an American secretary of defense named Donald Rumsfeld horrified the world. He tried to solidify the western alliance by referring to “a common enemy.” Which enemy was up to you: al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or Saddam Hussein. The new U.S. vice-president, Joe Biden, came to the 45th Munich Security Conference saying, “We need your advice.” His Security advisor, James Jones, even admitted mistakes had been made in the past. In Washington, idealism and self-criticism have taken the place of ignorant power politics and arrogance. The contrast could not be greater.
But by no stretch of the imagination has that solved any problems. Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier gloated that “positioning” would now be necessary. “Positioning” won’t happen very quickly, however, especially since even the United States has yet to make any concrete suggestions. There’s a lot of groping on all sides. True, Germany and France appeared more self-confident in Munich, and yes, they talked even tougher about Iran than our guests from the other side of the Atlantic. And that’s an irritating role-change, because the key European powers had nothing to offer in the way of successful strategies in the Middle East. In Germany’s case, Biden’s request for Europeans to take in prisoners to be released from Guantanamo became a litmus test. It’s hardly imaginable that the Grand Coalition would accede to Minister of the Interior Wolfgang Schäuble’s blunt “no!” After the next parliamentary elections in Germany the United States will ask us to send more troops to Afghanistan. And we will comply.
The conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan and with an Iran seeking nuclear weapons are difficult to solve impartially, although America’s desire to change to a paradigm in the Hindu Kush that will lead to more infrastructure repair seems a good start. The West has lost seven years in central Afghanistan and the alliance nations are only now beginning to give serious thought to how they might better coordinate their efforts there. They start at square one when it comes to opium production and governmental corruption, and the prospect of depending on President Hamid Karzai for help grows more bleak with each passing day. He didn’t exactly make a convincing impression at the Munich conference, and presidential elections are scheduled for next summer in Afghanistan.
There’s also a lot of uncertainty as to which path Iran is taking. That’s shown by an analysis of the speech given at the conference by the Iranian parliamentary president, Ali Larijani. The U.S. security advisor saw optimistic signs while Steinmeier saw it as “the same old language.” Presidential elections are also scheduled in Iran this summer so the expectation is that the United States will wait before undertaking high-level discussions with Tehran. If the theocratic republic remains stubborn, the world could be on a course leading to a hot war, one that could change the global scenery quite abruptly.
Idealism is a good precondition for talks, but it seldom becomes reality without opposition. The dominant themes of this security conference will also be the dominant themes of the next. Anything else would be a miracle.
But by no stretch of the imagination has that solved any problems. Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier gloated that “positioning” would now be necessary. “Positioning” won’t happen very quickly, however, especially since even the United States has yet to make any concrete suggestions. There’s a lot of groping on all sides. True, Germany and France appeared more self-confident in Munich, and yes, they talked even tougher about Iran than our guests from the other side of the Atlantic. And that’s an irritating role-change, because the key European powers had nothing to offer in the way of successful strategies in the Middle East. In Germany’s case, Biden’s request for Europeans to take in prisoners to be released from Guantanamo became a litmus test. It’s hardly imaginable that the Grand Coalition would accede to Minister of the Interior Wolfgang Schäuble’s blunt “no!” After the next parliamentary elections in Germany the United States will ask us to send more troops to Afghanistan. And we will comply.
The conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan and with an Iran seeking nuclear weapons are difficult to solve impartially, although America’s desire to change to a paradigm in the Hindu Kush that will lead to more infrastructure repair seems a good start. The West has lost seven years in central Afghanistan and the alliance nations are only now beginning to give serious thought to how they might better coordinate their efforts there. They start at square one when it comes to opium production and governmental corruption, and the prospect of depending on President Hamid Karzai for help grows more bleak with each passing day. He didn’t exactly make a convincing impression at the Munich conference, and presidential elections are scheduled for next summer in Afghanistan.
There’s also a lot of uncertainty as to which path Iran is taking. That’s shown by an analysis of the speech given at the conference by the Iranian parliamentary president, Ali Larijani. The U.S. security advisor saw optimistic signs while Steinmeier saw it as “the same old language.” Presidential elections are also scheduled in Iran this summer so the expectation is that the United States will wait before undertaking high-level discussions with Tehran. If the theocratic republic remains stubborn, the world could be on a course leading to a hot war, one that could change the global scenery quite abruptly.
Idealism is a good precondition for talks, but it seldom becomes reality without opposition. The dominant themes of this security conference will also be the dominant themes of the next. Anything else would be a miracle.
Previous article![]( "Still Dreaming of America, Arabs?!")
Next article![]( "It All Revolves Around America")
