what was most heartening was not that Bush won the battle within the United Nations but that Colin Powell won the war within the administration. “When I saw that Syria voted for the U.N. resolution on Iraq, I was thrilled,” said Hary Tjan Silalahi, an Indonesian scholar. “It’s not that I care about Syria at all, but I breathed a sigh of relief that people couldn’t look at this resolution and say it was America versus Arabs or the West versus Islam. It makes things so much better for us, the moderates in the Muslim world.” Because America’s policies were presented through an international body, in cooperation with other nations, it made it possible for people to gulp and accept our awesome power.In other words, Bush was smart to get the UN on board. It wouldn't matter in the short run (conquering Iraq and forcing a regime change), but it would in the long run (keeping allies who will support policies which increase civil rights and material comfort throughout the world). (via VodkaPundit)
UPDATE: Zakaria's article discusses how Eastern European and South Asian countries as more supportive of the US position than Western Europe. This article zooms in on the Eastern European front:
Romania and Poland will bring a "pro-American critical mass" to NATO, said Mircea Geoana, Romania's foreign minister in an interview. Indeed, whenever Mr. Geoana's French diplomatic counterparts worry about Romania's enthusiasm for the United States, he said he tells them that "after Romania enjoys several decades of prosperity like France, then we will have the luxury of taking the U.S. for granted."(via Best of the Web)
Throughout their history, Romania, Bulgaria and other Eastern European countries have been overrun and occupied by outside powers. They have survived by playing one power against the other, and by using those powers to protect themselves from local enemies. . . . Officials in this part of Europe are comfortable with an American military strategy that emphasizes American-led coalitions over strictly NATO ones.
<< Home