friends like these, who needs enemies?"
doubt those are the words rumbling from the headquarters
of the European Union, Russia, India, and Pakistan
as the unofficial American contingent, led by
Stanford professor emeritus of international relations
John W. Lewis, conclude their observation of North
Korea's nuclear facilities as a prelude to possible
multi-lateral negotiations with the rogue state.
the nuclear policy which applies to the negotiations
as well as other nuclear powers offers a prism
in which President Bush views 'friendly' and 'non-friendly'
nations with nuclear weapons.
may be potentially suspect.
Pentagon report leaked in 02, called The Nuclear
Posture Review (regarding American nuclear weapon
contingencies), offers a frightening, possible
'end-game' solution for the war on terror from
rogue nation states. According the policy review,
the United States has identified those nations
as Iraq, Iran, Libya, North Korea, and Syria.
However, in that same report, there are countries
among which we have normalized relations (Russia
and China). The question then is, who are our
friends and who are our enemies?
the Bush administration, there seems an unyielding
motto (ala The X-Files): "Trust, no one." In the
report's unveiling, apparently an officer(s) at
the Pentagon leaked the mostly unclassified report
to the press by giving a partial copy to The Los
Angeles Times and a full one to The New York Times
(both left of center news institutions), but as
the New York Times, with the full document noted,
key portions were kept secret.
as the President Bush emphasizes negotiation in
making progress with the remnants of the "Axis
of Exil," the apparent willingness of President
Bush to steer the United States away from a Clinton-derived,
coalition-driven, foreign policy and to an isolationist
posture (i.e. the Cold War), acting only in response
to threats that may jeopardize our strategic self-interests
has only shocked the world, but admittedly lowered
our international credibility.
the military document, the Pentagon goes on to
point out the three scenario in which nuclear
weapons may be used: an Iraqi attack on Israel
(Israel's perceived threat being Iran, not Iraq),
a North Korean attack on South Korea, and a Chinese
attack on Taiwan.
the case of Iran and North Korea (and the bravado
of Kim Jung Il), it has not been proven that they
even have nuclear weapons. It is also a confusing
signal for China after receiving 'favorite nation'
trading status (despite continued human rights
its face, such a plan appears to go against the
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty in which the United
States vowed not to use nuclear weapons against
non-nuclear weapons states. The strategic threats
the Pentagon identifies say simply 'attacks,'
not of what origin.
with breaking the ABM treaty with Russia, President
Bush appears to have no qualms of re-establishing
American imperialist objectives on contracts or
agreements that do not suit his administration's
goals. The only problem is what will the global,
political atmosphere be when the President leaves
this plan currently on the table, we risk the
developing world and our 'former enemies' wondering
whether our intentions are genuine or simply strategic
in the war on terror (especially since the selling
of Saddam Hussein as a "terrorist" did not sell
internationally, with only limited domestic success).
are three reasons why the Bush administration
should not implement this plan: first, its announcement
was not a deterrent to Saddam Hussein ahead of
the Iraq war; second, the doctrine will bring
distrust among our European allies of American
foreign objectives, precisely when the E.U. is
formulating their own military strategy; and third,
the document will raise doubts within Russia and
China as to whether the U.S. has acted in good
faith with current nuclear nonproliferation agreements.
to mention asking Russia, China and, most importantly,
the emerging European Union, to reevaluate strategic
military posture in regards in the U.S.
light of the continuing conventional Iraqi guerrilla
war, our strategic nuclear interests cannot afford
to change. The United States still refuses to
meet with the North Koreans in direct negotiations
and we are making little headway with Iran or
Syria. According to Rumsfeld and the Pentagon,
not only do we distrust our new 'friends' (Russia
and the EU) but we are willing to annihilate our
perceived enemies if it suits our best interests.
Bush, election year may mean giving peace a chance.
2004 Tommy Ates. All Rights Reserved.
Posted: January 16, 2004