Wednesday 6 February 2002

Axis or allies

Many of my friends are American, and quite a few relatives too. I can certainly understand and sympathize with the way they support their president in a time of war. It is a natural and often necessary thing to do, to stand united in times of crisis.

And Bush Jr is not a bad guy. He may not be the brightest candle on the Xmas tree, but he is not the retard his opponents liked to make him look during the campaign, when they collected his unfortunate statements. You can't know everything, and it is only human (or at least manly) to take a guess now and then. Besides, the guy has years of experience, and a team of even more seasoned advisors. Finally, it is worth a mention that he was elected legally, if not democratically in the strictest sense. And the difference was anyway so small that Gore wearing the wrong tie on TV one day would have reversed the numbers, if not more.

And he pretty quickly stepped into the role as leader and a rallying standard after the terror attacks on New York and Washington. He has played this role quite well. If anything too well, perhaps, but that is today's topic.

***

Perhaps as a result of the broad popular support, it could look like Bush has gained more personal influence on politics lately. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but in international matters I think he should remember that it's just a few months since he thought Nigeria was a continent. There are hundreds of nations out there and the relations among them can leave seasoned researchers puzzled at the best of times. Yes, I am talking about the "axis of evil" thing.

The statement was just part of a long speech, but it was formed in such a way as to be remembered. It is, and not with fondness. Allied nations have distanced themselves from the statement. The administration has clarified that it wasn't in any way meant as a declaration of war or some such. Yet the fire is out of the fireplace, and some damage is almost certainly done.

I may lose some American readers by saying this, but frankly, the guy should have said something much less memorable. This is why some extra IQ would have come in handy, whether of his own or hired in.

***

Don't get me wrong, the current rulers of Iran, Iraq and North Korea seem evil enough. Even Iran has only half-heartedly embraced democracy - the president is on the leash of the priesthood. The other two are utterly pathetic in their attempts at displaying some semblance of democracy, and probably don't much care. It may be that they don' feel evil - they have their own greater goals - but by the standards of most civilized countries, they certainly qualify as "evil". They don't by any stretch of imagination qualify as an "axis" though.

Iran and Iraq have been at war more or less since the Bronze Age, at least. Back when Iran was called Medea and Iraq Babylonia (or something similar in English). They were in a protracted war during my lifetime (and I'm around the same age as Bush). They are both Muslim, but they belong to the two main sects of that faith, roughly like Protestants and Catholics, not exactly the standard of brotherhood most of the time. North Korea is loosely allied with China, which has a conflict with islamists in their western parts. In short, the three of them are as much an axis as a dog, a cat and a rat. Each of them would be happy to see the other two nuked to kingdom come.

The only way these three rogue nations could be united would be if they were under imminent military threat from an outside power that targeted them all three at once, and that was too large for any one of them to have a chance against. This has never happened - until now.

Even if the USA (preferably along with a broad coalition of civilized countries) should try to topple these three governments, it would make sense to be a lot more circumspect. They should single out one country at a time, and run a massive propaganda war. The USA has a natural bonus in propaganda wars, because people all over the world listen to American broadcasting and watch American movies and so on. A massive, subtle, believable campaign to isolate one of the countries politically. Uncover (or, if all else fails, plant) proofs of impending terror attacks against allied targets. And of course the suffering of civilians under the current regime. Once the country is friendless and alone, it is time for ultimatums.

But before you go that far, you should ask yourself how this looks. In 2001, more than 3000 civilians were killed in a dramatic attack on American soil. Avenging this is bound to gain sympathy even among enemies in countries that live by a honor code of revenge. The Chinese, for instance, certainly understand this, and Arabs.

Striking first is another matter. And even if there are no plans of a military attack, the idea of pressure against a much smaller nation that has done you no harm yet is bound to turn the world against you. Right now most Americans might feel that America against the world would be a good idea. I'm not even sure they are aware that almost the whole world is on their side right now. But that's how it is. It would be a shame to waste that with a few thoughtless words.