The Belgravia Dispatch today offers a long, thoughtful and cogent article on the reasoning for voting for Bush in Novemember. I’ve stated on this blog before that I think George W Bush will win the next US presidential election. I lamented several months ago the fact that I faced two utterly lack-luster candidates, neither of whom were preferable and thanked my lucky stars that I didn’t have to choose who to pull the lever for.
My fantasy vote was later cast for Bush but recently I took time to reconsider all the facts. His fiscal impropriety, the FMA and of course the long honoured tradition of ‘shoveling money into rich people’s wallets as fast as is humanly possible’.
So on a domestic US policy note, I’m leaning -nay- falling over towards Kerry/Edwards. I’m a card carrying centre-left Blairite Labour party member after all, no matter what derision this might incite from the petulant demagogues of the Independent-reading class.
The problem I have with their campaign however is so massively substantial that if I were American I’d still find myself voting for Bush. That problem can be summed up in one word: “Allies”.
Kerry has made much of his reputed ability to ‘patch things up’ with the US’s allies. To approach all matters from a bilateral perspective and to ‘internationlize’ the War on Terror and its many facets. The problem is that his foreign policy has, in my mind been utterly devastated in just 2 months.
Firstly there is the argument that a Kerry government would bring more countries on board for the War on Terror. I find myself asking “What countries?” and can to the best of my ability only find 3, which would really add to the 30+ states that joined the coalition of the willing (‘unilateral action’ has never had so many participants) owing to the obvious isolationist policies of the PRC and Turkey’s domestic pressure base.
Well Schroeder was quite clear about whether Germany’s policy on both Iraq and the War on Terror would change. A dismissive laugh told us all we needed to know and a few weeks later when there were even the slightest rumours of a change the German government issued a frantic press release assuring all that Germany would be playing no part in America’s plans for the War on Terror re: Iraq. I think we can rule out Gehard for now Mr. Kerry.
France has been quite clear too. NATO plans to help train Iraqi defense forces have been sped up but still remain laughable (although in fairness the military projection capabilities of some of the member states is itself a point of amusement). France won’t change its stance on Iraq if Kerry is in office and have also had spokesmen denied such a policy reversal.
Russia is interesting. First of all Vladimir Putin and George W Bush actually have a decent working relationship, Kerry’s ‘personal touch’ wouldn’t seem too potent a force in this situation. Secondly Russia is already moving under America’s influence albeit slowly, its hand forced by the atrocities committed at Beslan by terrorists trained in the very camps the US destroyed in Afghanistan.
Crucial to these countries (and indeed China) is the ‘elephant in the sitting room’ of UNSCAM. China, France and Russia received a hearty share of the revenues from this despicable perversion of aid revenue. How, I wonder can you trumpet the virtues of the United Nations (even ignoring its lamentable record on Genocide in the past 20 years) in the face of this enormous web corruption? Unless Kerry is willing to bribe foreign political forces with a sum from the National Reserves proportional to the reputed $5 billion they received from Saddam’s Oil Vouchers, it seems unlikely that his administration would have obtained a level examination field from those who are administering his much vaunted ‘Global Test’.
11 Years of UN diplomacy followed by another last push in the year leading up till April 2003 doesn’t seem like a ‘rush’ to war to me. The Bush administration gathered an astonishing coalition of allies and seemed to falter only in obtaining the support of nations who’s political ambition was either the opposition of American geopolitical dominance or the retention of vast oil contracts entered into with Saddam’s regime. You cannot berate Bush for failing to bring France, Russia or Germany on board when such a feat was rendered nearly impossibly by a myriad of bribes, greed and political self-aggrandizement. What other countries can Kerry mean? His policy seems to be simply founded upon the shrill cries of the 90’s era literati rather than fact. He’s playing to his home team, which is forgivable, especially given Bush’s monstrous support for the FMA but that doesn’t make for a sound foreign policy any more than the contemptible amendment represents the spirit of the US constitution.
The second problem Kerry’s platform has with allies is his effective disregard for the US’s existing allies. You might recall my indignation at Jimmy Carter’s speech at the DNC where he belittled the efforts of both of my countries whilst setting the franco-prussian alliance on a pedestal. Unfortunately Kerry seems to have taken to this cause with great enthusiasm and his remarks about Allawi after the man had delivered his speech to the US congress bordered on the grotesque. It seems ironic that the Bush should be so vilified for having ‘wrecked our relationships with our allies’ when in fact he had failed only to earn the cooperation of powers who’s only discernable foreign policy has been to counteract US interests, whereas Kerry and his team appear to be tripping over themselves to insult, belittle and trash the US’s most vital allies.
Cheney made a good point in the debate with Edwards and that was that Kerry’s campaign is constantly listing coalition casualty figures but never takes into account the tremendous effort and expenditure of lives of the Iraqis themselves. They are the US’s most important and valuable allies. You don’t insult them and expect to be the president of the United States, you don’t insinuate that they aren’t pulling their weight or that they’re weak if you’re going to be president of the United States and you don’t pander to folks in your own party who are actively rooting for their opponents if you’re going to be president of the United States. Kerry’s foreign policy makers don’t seem to understand this and that is why I’d be voting for George W Bush.
The Democratics won’t make it to the whitehouse this year and the reason is the name at the top of their ticket.
Hillary in 08!!
Later
John
Posted by John Swaine at October 17, 2004 04:30 PM | TrackBack