Coalition of the Grudging
Slate's Jacob Weisburg has a good argument today for the U.S. to again revamp its multilateral streak and press for NATO to take up peacekeeping responsibilities if the U.S. withdraws from Iraq.
Now I don't agree with Weisburg when he compares Iraq to Vietnam -- it's not anything like Iraq other than we may lose and the U.S. certainly did not enter Vietnam to stop totalitarianism -- and his comparison of a possible genocide in Iraq to Cambodia is wrong -- it would be more like the Balkans. Nevertheless, he makes some great points, especially why it would be in certain countries interest to stop Iraq from falling into genocidal madness.
Now I don't agree with Weisburg when he compares Iraq to Vietnam -- it's not anything like Iraq other than we may lose and the U.S. certainly did not enter Vietnam to stop totalitarianism -- and his comparison of a possible genocide in Iraq to Cambodia is wrong -- it would be more like the Balkans. Nevertheless, he makes some great points, especially why it would be in certain countries interest to stop Iraq from falling into genocidal madness.
Where might troops come from? The most willing providers would probably be "new" Europeans such as the Poles, who remain eager to demonstrate their cooperative capabilities and earn some cash. Muslim troops might come from neighboring Jordan and Turkey, which have obvious stakes in preventing the refugee crisis that would attend violent partition. Western European nations would be reluctant, but possibly willing, to contribute when faced with the consequences of inaction. For France and Germany, the bargain would involve Bush admitting, at least implicitly, that his previous unilateralism was bad and wrong. Call it the Coalition of the GrudgingSpot on.
<< Home