More Sugar, Less Vinegarposted by Jazz at 2/23/2005 01:55:00 PM
NOTE: YOU ARE VIEWING AN ARCHIVED POST AT RUNNING SCARED'S OLD BLOG. PLEASE VISIT THE NEW BLOG HERE.
It is hypocritical for the administration to punish Syria for assassinating a former Lebanese prime minister (assuming the Syrians did it) when the U.S. led its own campaign to kill leaders of the Iraqi regime, including Saddam Hussein and his two sons. It is also duplicitous for the Bush administration to point the finger at Syria for having 14,000 troops in Lebanon, when the United States originally approved that troop presence and when it has 150,000 of its own troops occupying Iraq.
If odious regimes such as Syria are never rewarded for anything positive, they have no incentive to behave better. This does not mean holding them in a tight embrace or condoning their abysmal human rights practices. It does mean treating them with a wary pragmatism and not assuming all they do is evil.
I know that treasonous words like that might come as a shock to the more hawk minded in the crowd, but others might recognize it something we used to call "diplomacy." The article continues.
It's a great piece on peace, if you will. Remember that only this week, standing in Europe, Bush told the world that rumors that he was about to attack Iran were "ridiculous." Just to get it on the record, here's the full quote with no editing.
The Bush administration should follow its own lead and imitate its successful policy with Libya. The administration provided a powerful incentive for Muammar Qaddafi, Libyas despotic strongman who also has been suspected of trying to kill a foreign leader, to give up his nuclear weapons program. It offered Qaddafi an end to international economic isolation in exchange for better behavior.
In contrast, Syrias and Irans efforts at some cooperation with U.S. policies have been shot down in their infancy. In the case of Iran, the regime quit cooperating with the United States when it realized that the U.S. military presence in Afghanistan was more or less permanent. Furthermore, President Bush has actually declared that he would not ease relations even if the Iranians gave up their nuclear program. Why should those regimes improve their behavior if they feel that they can do nothing right and the goal posts keep moving back when they take a step, however tentative, in a positive direction? As unbelievable as it may seem, considering the Iraqi debacle, the military threats by the Bush administration against Iran and Syria closely resemble the pre-invasion threats the administration made against Iraq.
A little more sugar and a little less vinegar toward rogue states might give these countries an incentive for better behavior.
"This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous."
Then, with no pause for breath, he turned around and immediately said:
"Having said that, all options are on the table."
I'm still willing to hold out hope and give Bush the benefit of the doubt and say that he might be serious. Time will tell, and with any luck, we'll be here to record it for you.