(By Ray D.)
Who needs enemies? Forget about Iraq – the vast majority of Germans (over two-thirds) don’t even support the mission in Afghanistan. So much for “solidarity.” Via Bloomberg:
“German voters are uneasy about Germany’s military
engagement in Afghanistan regardless of the mandate, polls show.
Sixty-eight percent of 1,000 people questioned by Emnid oppose
Germany’s military deployment, according to a poll published on
May 22, three days after three German soldiers and five Afghan
civilians were killed in a suicide attack in Afghanistan. No
more than 29 percent said they supported the engagement.”
Put another way – when the chips are down – most Germans do NOT stand with America in Afghanistan or in the fight against terrorism.
Also – consider this fundamental reality: One of the primary motivations for anti-Americanism is the imbalance in military power between the United States and Europe. I addressed this in a 2004 letter to George Soros – as true today as it was back then:
The fundamental imbalance of power arising from Europe’s inability
to live up to its military obligations and its lingering dependence on
the USA provides for an environment of inequality and resentment. Many
European nations such as France and Germany have come to define
themselves through their resistance to US “dominance” or “hegemony”
which they define as “unilateral” despite the fact that the US is
currently in a coalition consisting of dozens of nations in Iraq. They
insist that the US seek “legitimacy” through “multilateral” channels.
In reality, these terms are code words for European checks on US power.
Despite your claims to the contrary Mr. Soros, there is nothing
particularly “multilateral” or “legitimate” about one, two or even
three nations with a veto in the UN Security Council, (France, Russia
and China) determining whether US actions are justified or not. To me,
a Chinese dictator sitting in Beijing should not have the right to
determine what is “multilateral” or “legitimate” in the world, yet that
is exactly how the UN Security Council works. To expect Americans to
put their security in the hands of such a dictator is, again, not only
unrealistic but also dangerous, particularly in a post 9/11 world.The solution is for European nations to step up to the plate in
accepting greater international responsibility. Until they do so, they
will never be accepted by the United States as “equal partners.” That
means they will have to spend far more on their militaries so that they
can actually resolve conflicts such as the one in Bosnia without US
help. A stronger Europe would allow the United States to spend less on
its military and more on international aid. A stronger Europe would
contribute to a greater equilibrium of power in the world. But a
stronger Europe standing side-by-side with the US in partnership will
never become a reality if Europeans don’t become proactive and simply
continue to blame the United States for all the world’s problems. I
fear that your criticisms contribute to and reaffirm this complacency
born of blame.Unfortunately, in your book and on your website, you choose to
largely ignore the failings of the Europeans, the UN and the
international community. You and many others have turned President Bush
into a convenient scapegoat for virtually everything. I believe that
this flagrant lack of balance also runs rampant in the European press
and has done serious damage to transatlantic relations. If we refuse to
look at this problem from a more comprehensive, balanced position, we
will never be able to solve it. And the European bubble of impotence
and resentment will continue to grow and grow.
This will not change when Bush leaves office. It is the power gap – not Bush or his policies – that, among other things, drives fundamental, long-term European anti-American resentments.
