The Next Big Foreign Policy Disaster

Posted by JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief in At TMV.
Jun 16th, 2006 | 6 responses

Is this it?

6 Responses to “The Next Big Foreign Policy Disaster”

1. Rudi says:

   June 16, 2006 at 10:06 am

   Joe,
   Thanks for the link to Newshog, both of you are a voice of reason. Some of the post of late have drifted over to the Wingnut side, need more thought from the middle. Some of these Wingnuts might call “The Bull Moose” aer liberal.
2. liberalhawk says:

   June 16, 2006 at 10:31 am

   sure india pakistan is dangerous. Has been for a long time. And sure, we’re more tied up with the Paki govt since 9/11. We didnt have any real choice that I can see. So I think the post you linked to is 1. silly in claiming this is “bushs fault” and 2. Looks absurdly uninformed, in thinking that south asia is not something on the minds of everyone with an interest in international affairs
3. Cernig says:

   June 16, 2006 at 11:03 am

   Liberalhawk, I’m not certain you did more than skim the post for an excuse to snark.

   1) Both the Indian parliament and the Pakistani FM have both been very clear that the catalyst for the latest upsurge in their arms race is the India/US nuclear deal. The Japanese have said the same thing. It’s all in the post. I don’t recall that deal being one of Clintons. However, as I say in the first para of the post, I don’t expect a Dem President to do any different.

   2) The point of the post is that Americans with an interest in international affairs ARE ewatching the sub-continent…mostly with a view to short-term domestic economic gain rather than long term destabilization in the region. However, the American populace in general have no clue, as is evidenced by the utter lack of MSM coverage. Amarica as a whoile, therefore, will be surprised as usual.

   Which brings us to
   3) Anyone who thinks that is a purely Bush bashing post needs treated for institutional paranoia. The whole point is that there is a pattern to US foreign policy no matter who is in the WH.

   Set up a situation where nations or groups seek to be friends with the US, then do various short-term things designed to help the US domestic bottom line which always includes selling arms to everyone. The fact that their old enemies are receiving arms from the US kicks of a cycle of more purchases and growing mutual animosity and finally poisons the “hearts and minds” well for the US. Wait a decade or two and let the nation be surprised when conflict erupts and the new local bosses are inimical to the US.

   Latin America, the ME, Africa, and now the Subcontinent. Its a pattern. America does not “do” foreign policy. It does domestic policy that effects foreigners. To change that would require a change in emphasis in thinking about America as the sole superpower.

   Regards, Cernig A Newshog

   Regards, C
4. Cernig says:

   June 16, 2006 at 11:05 am

   PS Scuse the typos, I was in a hurry

   Regards, C
5. BrianOfAtlanta says:

   June 16, 2006 at 3:34 pm

   Really, Cernig, you accuse Liberalhawk of snark when your article contains this gem:

   The same is true of India, where a friend of Pakistan is automatically distrusted and where democracy has always been a fragile thing that has survived more by luck than intent.

   Pot, meet kettle.

   I agree that your article didn’t bash Bush so much, but it certainly was taking cheap shots at India. So, it destabilizes the region for the US to cozy up to the most stable democracy in the region? Would it stabilize the situation if we had ignored India, thereby encouraging them to gravitate to China or Russia?

   Our economic interests in India go far beyond arms sales. That’s miniscule compared to the commercial ties between our nations. We already have large commercial, non-military interests in India, which were there long before 9/11.

   It’s interesting that you acknowledge that Pakistan is the less likely long-term friend, yet decry the US strengthening ties to India. Of course, since you view India as a democracy more by luck than intent, you may see things differently. Considering how long India has been a democracy, though, they seem to be very lucky.
6. Cernig says:

   June 16, 2006 at 7:06 pm

   Hi Brian,

   It’s funny, I keep being accused of being anti-Indian when I am actually a fan of that nation, albeit a realistic one.

   That opinion of a “fragile” democracy is based on the amount of attempted coups, intercine unrest, ethnic violence, local sepratist terror etc in the last 4 decades.

   I’ve said before and will say again, I vastly prefer India as an ally to the rogue state of pakistan…just don’t look at it with rose colored glasses.

   And don’t help both sides to fuel their arms race – just because Chian and Russia are doing so doesn’t make it right.

   Regards, C