Tom Oliphant's Column From Europe - WOW

Europe's risky waiting game
By Thomas Oliphant | May 18, 2004

HELSINKI


JOHN KERRY'S mildly impolitic remark in March about the extent to which European "leaders" are hoping he beats President Bush misses the more important fact about how wide and deep Europe's rejection of Bush's self-defeating know-it-all-ism is.


What is coming from the top of European countries' establishments reflects a pervasive view all over the European street. The revulsion at our conduct in Iraq is but a part of a deeper reaction to official US behavior across a wide range of important issues from the environment to human rights.

In Europe, though, the reaction against Bush's failed leadership has reached the dangerous point where far too many people have simply given up on the possibility of change for the better and are simplistically waiting (not just hoping) for the American election in November.

-snip-

After two weeks roaming the four Nordic countries -- Norway, Denmark, Sweden, and Finland -- to exchange views with colleagues, elites in and out of government, and citizens, I find no way to overstate the rejection of Bush's leadership. It involves opposition not simply to last year's invasion of Iraq but to the American occupation as well. It involves more than opposition to the Bush position on international environmental cooperation and the enforcement of human rights standards but to the Bush style of imperious rejection even of the idea of multilateral work on issues of obviously common concern.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/05/18/europes_risky_waiting_game/
--------
Wish most Americans could have the experience of traveling to other countries for an eye-opening perspective.

they would not be as arrogant to begin with :)

evil is the word I heard most

I didn't vote for Bush. I think of it as self protection.

"...my sense from Washington is that an increasingly election-obsessed President Bush may be more likely to listen to the rest of the world over the next, crucial six weeks."

The only scenario I can envision is if Bush gets "paid" to listen, that is, paid in terms of more foreign troops coming to Iraq, paid in terms of clear-cut UN involvement, and paid in terms of foreign financial support for Iraq. And all of this "listening" could not entail ceding any precious American "sovereignty."

Other than that, it's very, very doubtful that Bush will open his mind to any insights from foreign leaders.

to everyone except his little circle of ideologues, and bad habits die hard.

Just like usual for him.

None of them would believe a word that came out of Chimpy's piehole and they wouldn't trust any pledge he made...

Add to that, Chimpy would probably do his usual shtick: "The nations of Europe must yadda yadda..." "NATO must blither blather..."

To which the natural and reasonable response would be:

For a second rate man he wants his ego feed and seems to need it.

... is that the Europeans should not "wait and see" who wins the election in November. The author tries to make the point that events occuring now are too important to be left unaddressed, and that if they don't make an effort to work with the current administartion the situation in Iraq could worsen for all concerned.

Personally, I don't buy this argument. I believe the worst thing for the situation is another four years of Bush, and the Europeans would be helping his chances if they make an effort to pull his fanny out of the fire.

Besides, I think they've realized by now that nothing good can come from assisting the U.S. government while the Bush cabal is in charge. The neoconservative agenda is simply not in their interests, nor in the interests of the world at large.

Although Kerry seems bent on continuing the policy of a long term U.S. presence in Iraq, he is someone the Europeans feel they can work with and count on to restore the foreign policy with which they have felt secure all these years.

To John Pilger and those who declare no foreign policy difference between Bush and Kerry, I say give our European allies at least some credit for knowing a radically dangerous regime when they see one.

over the next few months when European leaders say openly that they hope Kerry wins the election.

Why bother with politics as usual when there is so much on the line?

I doubt it would sway hard-core bushites but it would vindicate Kerry's remarks in March and possibly show America that Kerry has a foot in the foreign policy door while bush has had his ass handed to him by the same leaders.

If the Europeans are seen as trying to influence the election against Bush, more voters may respond with "I'll show them damn furriners what fer fer not mindin' der own bidness," rather than "Gee, if the Europeans hate him there must be something wrong with him."

I think the European leadership (for the most part) is studiously avoiding that trap.

Kerry has to moderate his public views. Ever hear of Sirhan Sirhan?

He's gotta get into office before he can do anything about Iraq. I'm sure he wants out as bad as any of us here, but he can't say that and get elected and he can't say he's the choice of France without some subhuman tool shooting him on a balcony "because he's a traitor from France"

The difference is CONTROL.

The Bushies are control freaks who have steadfastly refused to give any real power to either Iraqis or the UN regarding Iraq. Giving up power runs counter to neocon imperial design. Anything they are giving up now is done begrudgingly and will be as little as they can get away with.

Kerry is not interested in maintaining power. He just wants stability and to get out. The only reason he would stay at all is so as not to leave a power vacuum for terrorists to exploit. But there is no neocon imperialistic urge. That is a huge difference!!! the Europeans know this even if our press avoids discussing this central issue and pretends they say the same thing.

While I expect other citizens of the world to do better job of seperating a gov't from its people than the jingoistic Americans who beat up Koreans when it was reported that the Japanese were competing with American industry, I'm still reluctant to travel the world as a spot-lighted American when THE NEOCONS HAVE MADE US 'THE EVIL EMPIRE.'

Don't turn down an opportunity to tour with your band and show the rest of the world what America is truly like (unless your band is a smashing/stomping/guitar breaking symbol of anger). Each American living or traveling abroad represents America be they obnoxsious or open minded.

I've been to Asia twice since the selection and haven't had any problems. My experience has always been that people over there differentiate between the government and it's citizens. The US really does have a special place in the minds of most people I've met - they look up to what it could be rather than what it is.

You'll be treated MUCH BETTER passing through here than MANY artists have been trying to do their gigs in the U.S. We're talking folks who have toured there yearly. Just STOP IT :spank: and come on over (while you still can...)