Tommy Ates OnlineŠ: Europe Deserves More Respect

What were they thinking? The decision by the Bush administration to shut out foreign nations who decided not to support the Iraq invasion has not only backfired, but shows the lack of a coherent policy on how to deal with the international community. In terms of image, its not simply a matter of bad press (Bush has had enough of that in the past few months). The problem lies in the delegation authority in which major foreign and domestic policy decision are decided by cabinet officials, often without any sign of approval by the President. The power of the surrogates is overtaking the notion of President Bush being able to reign in his administration. Moving into 2004, thats bad news.

What were they thinking?

The decision by the Bush administration to shut out foreign nations who decided not to support the Iraq invasion has not only backfired, but shows the lack of a coherent policy on how to deal with the international community.

In terms of image, its not simply a matter of bad press (Bush has had enough of that in the past few months). The problem lies in the delegation authority in which major foreign and domestic policy decision are decided by cabinet officials, often without any sign of approval by the President. The power of the surrogates is overtaking the notion of President Bush being able to reign in his administration. Moving into 2004, thats bad news.

When the memo released by Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz was posted on the Pentagons Project Management Office website (group running U.S. funded Iraqi reconstruction projects), for many non-coalition countries the announcement was a slap in the face by the administration, after Secretary of State Powell met with the foreign ministers of both France and Germany, encouraging them to vote for more economic aid and assistance to post-Saddam Iraq. When the United Nations Security Council affirmed the security resolution (presented by the U.S.) releasing funds, Powells mission focus further on repairing the diplomatic chasm developed over the final war resolution at the U.N, while the President appointed, long-time Bush family friend, special Economic Envoy to Iraq James Baker to help take care of the countrys economic woes. To reduce Iraqs massive debt largely owed to France, Germany, and Russia (all of whom opposed the war).

And now, the Wolfowitz memo has severely compromised Bakers position.

In the wake of the memo, Powell will have to be sent again to mend fences with our 'allies, currently very confused and not quite sure whether America is their friend or trade partner of convenience. To no surprise, the reaction from the French, Germans has been of anger and restraint for official" word. Our closest ally, Canada is in disbelief (they gave money for reconstruction); while Russia indicated it may not forgive Iraqs debts under Saddam Hussein in retaliation. Meanwhile, the press has yet to hear from President Bush regarding this incident.

Ironically, it was Bush himself who, after the war, tried to set the tone for reconciliation, in the eyes of Europe, neither Powell nor a rephrasing of the policy language will satisfy the French and Germans -- the President will have to make a definitive statement. Yes or no?

(Which likely means the administration will backtrack.)

Why the hoopla? Even if the funds are from American tax payers, $18.6 billion dollars is a lot of money. Money that multi-national corporations (no mater what country they are from) cannot and would not ignore. Yet, the Bush administration is asking France, Germany, and Russia to absolve Iraqs debt? Even to a child, this reconstruction policy makes little sense.

If America couldnt use our talents of persuasion to get Europe in the war, then how were we going to get them to agree to help us on our terms? It is the United States who needs the economic assistance, not Europe.

Evidently, President Bush doesnt feel he needs greater oversight of Iraqi fiscal matters, ensuring that the political agenda of some in the cabinet is not overshadowing the economic work needed to re-create Iraq as a fit and fledgling democracy. However, in order to establish the new Iraqs economy in an unbiased" fashion, economic concerns should be handled as a separate unit under James Baker, not the auspices of the American military (politically-harried Rumsfeld).

But, Bushs economic problems dont end there.

The indecision of the Bush White House in trying to nation-build" Iraq within 6 months simply feeds into the hands of insurgents who see the United States as another imperial power setting up shop in the region. Like it or not, the world community must assist the transformation of Iraq from a dictatorship to a land of freedom and self-determination, which means all of Europe, not just Spain and Romania (who supported the war), and the vast resources of the United Nations.

But in hindsight, perhaps we shouldnt be surprised since Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was able to run the military in the way he saw fit, overriding the suggestions of many in military brass who foretold the logistical and operational problems that a prolonged occupation in Iraq would provide. Instead like Cheney, he held on to the neoconservative belief (from the late1990s) that stability in the Mideast would result from the ouster of Saddam Hussein. America could go it alone."

How wrong we were.