"It is time to turn away from the disagreements of the past. It is time to open a new chapter in our relationship and a new chapter in our alliance," Rice said in a speech to students and academics at Paris' prestigious Sciences Politiques university.
"America stands ready to work with Europe on our common agenda and Europe must stand ready to work with America. After all, history will surely judge us not by our old disagreements but by our new achievements,"
(Via Yahoo News: Rice Urges New Chapter in US-Europe Relations)
"Europe must stand ready to work with America" eh? Does that sound like an order to you?
Ever since Bush came to power, egged on by the PNAC members in his own inner circle, this administration has continually tried to order Europe around, on the basis that the US is the only remaining superpower. We saw it over trade, we saw it over Iraq, we saw it over the Ukrainian elections, we've seen it many times. Yet Europe is very aware that the only area where it loses to the US is in raw military power. In population, economical strength, size of market, industrialisation and non-military technology the EU matches or surpasses it's neighbour across the pond.
Faced with a strongarm Bush regime, Europe has told the US to take a hike more often than it once used to, or has exerted it's own leading role in such areas as the battle against world poverty or global warming. Other nations have also made moves to end or abridge America's unipolar dominance - and the Bush administration has always been either surprised by those moves or has remained seemingly unaware of them (for example the recent alliances between Russia, Brazil, India and China we have followed at Newshog).
Now,from the same news report as the quote above,an anonymous State Depatment spokesman says Rice gave this Paris speech:
to send the message to Europe that the Bush administration has ended its own internal debate about whether to view a united Europe as a rival or as a partner.
Lets be precise about this. They are hoping Europe will stop being a rival because they have realised that bullying wasn't working the way it was meant to. It seems that they can't get over the mindset that leads to Rice issuing orders to other sovereign states, though. I predict Europe will want a partnership of equals, not "orders phrased nicely" and will wait to see if actions speak louder than words.
15 comments:
Cernig,
Come on, bro...
'"Europe must stand ready to work with America" eh? Does that sound like an order to you?'
It does. Then again, no, it does not, since the first part of that sentence is: "America stands ready to work with Europe..." I mean come on... Rice is over there trying to make nice... That's all
"Yet Europe is very aware that the only area where it loses to the US is in raw military power. In population, economical strength, size of market, industrialisation and non-military technology the EU matches or surpasses it's neighbour across the pond."
This, sadly, is not so. And things are trending worse for Europe. In other words, the gap is widening. Regardless, this is a non-sequitir, because the U.S. is NOT trying to bully anyone.
We asked our allies for help against Saddam Hussein, who we thought was a threat to us. What Europe has done is side with Saddah Hussein against the U.S... And really it was just Germany, Spain, and France that strongly opposed the U.S. policy. That's all this huge broughhaha is about. That's it. The rest is a bunch of petty details that really don't matter.
Hi Hark,
And when the Bush House sounded out Europe on supporting a hardline stance on Iran, even Blair told them to take a hike.
Plus, sorry, but I stand by the statement that Europe surpasses the US in most superpower criteria except the military. Try reading all of this excellent Salon article and see what I mean. (you have to page past the infomercial first)
Regards, Cernig
Hark.
Did you totally forget that Bush was lying to Europe at the same time he was asking them for help?
Could their "siding with Sadam" possibly been just the honest facing of facts?
Let me repeat what the AJC wouldn't print.
The same people who said Iraq had a nuclear weapons program are the ones telling us Iran has one also. They were lying before. What makes anyone think they are telling the truth this time? The IAEA has given Iran a clean bill just as they did Iraq. They were right the first time. What makes anyone think they are wrong this time?
Questions to ponder.
Kirkrrt
Here is another take:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005242
and another, much more brutal take:
http://www.newamerica.net/index.cfm?pg=article&DocID=2005
I recall Brussels told the U.S. to butt out of the Balkans... Milosivich was a European problem and Europeans would handle it. We did. Until Europe demanded that the U.S. end his regime. My roommate at that time was from Italy. Great guy. He told me the U.S. "had" to take care of it. When I asked him why, when it was in Europe's back yard, he said because we just had to... when I asked him why he said because we were the only ones who could...
So saying "other than militarily" the EU and America are equal is kind of like saying "other than female A's flat chest" female A and female B are equally sexy. I mean it just ain't so...
Kirkrrt,
What was he lying about? EVERY intelligence orgnaization, inluding those of Europe, thought Saddam had WMD... The contention involved what should be done about that...
In the interest of foregoing name calling I will just ask, "What have you been smoking?"
I recommend less Fox News and a little more BBC, The Star, and Al Jazeera. Actually I recommend equal amounts of Fox News and Al Jazeera. Then you will get news slanted from both ends of the spectrum.
Just look at the two UN groups that were inspecting and searching Iraq before we invaded. Their reports were no WMD or WMD programs and no nuclear programs at all.
Guess what?
That is what the administration has been forced to admit.
The world listened to our "Slam Dunk" case presented to the UN. The reaction from the European press was less than enthusiastic. No other intelligence organization (other than Isreal) was willing to accept our case.
Kirkrrt
I appreciate the lack of name calling. But if you think Bush lied, rather than made mistakes, re WMD, u are drinking the haterade.
1st of all there were no inspectors in Iraq for years before the invasion because Saddam wouldn't allow them.
2nd of all Chirac said he had them.
3rd of all- well- the evidence is strong that Bush did not lie, but was wrong.
Read these if you wish to stop drinking the haterade.
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0804/0804quiz.htm
http://www.rightwingnews.com/quotes/demsonwmds.php
http://www.eriksvane.com/lies.htm
Cheers!
Harkonnendog
haterhash?
Hi Hark, I read those articles and their entire evidence seems to rest on the US having a higher per capita GDP. Thing is, I have lived on both sides of the pond and I honestly think quality of life for the majority is better in Europe. A huge amount of the US's per capita advantage gets spent on megabusterbloodvesselburgers or new weaponry. Also, it only takes a Gates and a few near-Gates to throw the mathematical "average" way out of line with what the "average" guy or girl really experiences. Other than a misleading per capita GDP figure and military might, Europe is out-performing the US in every area of superpower-ism.
I know - its almost heretical to suggest the USA isn't "bigger, biggest, best". Many Americans get this meme at such an early age and so obsessively that they cannot even see it when they are arguing from emotion.
Regards, C
That last paragraph is so true.
When you talk to some Americans you have to make sure you do not infer in some way that your country is better than their's.
As a general rule I like Americans but I have met some on my travels who, when you ask them where they are from say........
America..TA DA!!!!!!!!!!!!
Then I ask if it is N or S America and they get mad.
Usually all the flags all over their clothes and gear give them away.
If an American is in a group with a number of other nationalities, the American always assumes he is top dog.
In Australia they are not liked.It dates from the second world war when what was said about Americans was this...
Over-paid..over-sexed, and over-here.
Of course the Aussies were jealous because the Yanks had higher wages, better uniforms and generally were better looking so they took all their women.Maybe a bigger gene pool.
America has so much going for it that if it sorts out this mess it is in, things should look up.
shadows
Cernig,
I don't disagree with you about quality of life issues. Maybe Europeans have it better- maybe Americans do... It's hard to quantify since Americans and Europeans have different value systsems. I have friends who work 80 weeks!!!, which I find insane. But they enjoy what they are doing so... different strokes, I guess.
But quality of life doesn't define superpower status, does it? I mean you've sort of redefined it. If that's the issue I imagine Australia is more of a superpower than the U.S. or the E.U.
Shadow, we Americans don't have another name for ourselves. Canadians call themselves that- Brazlians call themselves that- Equadorans- u name the country in either of the Americas, they identify themselves with their own country. There is no United Statesian name... It ain't arrogance... It just turned out that way...
I don't buy your theory about Australian resentment, btw. I've seen way too many hottie Australian women- y'all are pissed cause the best surfer in the world is an American (from my state! ;)
Cheers!
Harkonnendog
You don't quite get my drift Hark, when I say Americans identify themselves as Americans TA DA!! I mean they think the only America is their America.
However, I think most Americans are nice, if a little arrogant, and certainly naive.
As to the best surfer in the world, what about Australia's Laine Huntley, best woman surfer for about 10 years.
Not to mention all the other male surfers who have hit the top over the years.
Sorry about that.........
We're the best....better than allll the restttt... better than aannnyyone.....
shadows
i caught your drift exactly. my point was that we DON'T say American because we think we are the only part of the Americas that counts... it is just an accident of linguistics, at best, or a holdover from when the brits started saying it, over 300 years ago, at worst. in which case u should blame cernig :)
Hi Hark,
I will let you in on a secret. Australia was an experiment - the English sent a whole bunch of Scots there in an attempt to breed the perfect bartender *grin*
America was likewise an experiment in breeding - the perfect Englishmen - but some Scots and Irish got in and spoiled the gene-pool then the Scots freemasons led a revolution or something.
If it wasn't for us Scots, where would the world be? :-)
Regards, C
Post a Comment