Læs en meget lang artikel på The Newyorker, og se om "I" ikke kan lære lidt
om, hvad de går og tænker på i administrationen, og udenfor, - det ER ikke
bare Anders And-simpelt, som mange åbenbart tror:
www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/051031fa_fact2
En bid:
Yet the two do not see each other much anymore. According to friends of
Scowcroft, Rice has asked him to call her to set up a dinner, but he has
not, apparently, pursued the invitation. The last time the two had dinner,
nearly two years ago, it ended unhappily, Scowcroft acknowledged. "We were
having dinner just when Sharon said he was going to pull out of Gaza," at
the end of 2003. "She said, 'At least there's some good news,' and I said,
'That's terrible news.' She said, 'What do you mean?' And I said that for
Sharon this is not the first move, this is the last move. He's getting out
of Gaza because he can't sustain eight thousand settlers with half his Army
protecting them. Then, when he's out, he will have an Israel that he can
control and a Palestinian state atomized enough that it can't be a problem."
Scowcroft added, "We had a terrible fight on that."
They also argued about Iraq. "She says we're going to democratize Iraq, and
I said, 'Condi, you're not going to democratize Iraq,' and she said, 'You
know, you're just stuck in the old days,' and she comes back to this thing
that we've tolerated an autocratic Middle East for fifty years and so on and
so forth," he said. Then a barely perceptible note of satisfaction entered
his voice, and he said, "But we've had fifty years of peace."
For most of the past hundred years, American foreign policy has oscillated
between two opposing impulses: to make the world more like America, or to
deal with it as it is. Those who object to what they call "interference" in
the affairs of others-today's realists-often cite the words of John Quincy
Adams, who in 1821 said that America stands with those who seek freedom and
independence, "but she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy."
By contrast, Woodrow Wilson, the unbounded moralist, said, in seeking a
declaration of war against Germany in 1917, that "the world must be made
safe for democracy." Wilson told Congress, "We are but one of the champions
of the rights of mankind. We shall be satisfied when those rights have been
made as secure as the faith and the freedom of nations can make them."
At different times, the isolationist impulse, which would have America
withdraw entirely from the affairs of the world, has been felt strongly in
Washington-for instance, in the America First movement before the Second
World War. Today, few in the Republican Party, or even among liberal
Democrats, believe that America has no military role to play in any
hemisphere other than its own.
The desire to undermine or overthrow brutal regimes-to transform them into
democracies-is irresistible for many Americans. The realists argue that
these global Wilsonians have an unacceptably high tolerance for the kind of
instability that the export of democracy can bring. "The United States . . .
must temper its missionary spirit with a concept of the national interest
and rely on its head as well as its heart in defining its duty to the
world," Henry Kissinger wrote in the third volume of his memoirs. By
contrast, the current President, in his second inaugural address, set for
America a breathtakingly large mission. "It is the policy of the United
States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and
institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending
tyranny in our world," Bush said.
For Brent Scowcroft, the rhetoric is not matched by reality. "I believe that
you cannot with one sweep of the hand or the mind cast off thousands of
years of history," he says.
.........
GW Bush er blevet uvenner med sin far, fordi han ikke ville tage afstand
fra, hvad hans nære ven Scowcroft sagde under interviewet.
begin 666 spacer.gif
M1TE&.#EA`0`!`)'_`/___P```,# P ```"'Y! $```(`+ `````!``$```("
$5 $`.P``
`
end