face-off on Terrorism strategy
Bush's foreign policy fuels debate
BY MARINA DUNDJERSKI
UCLA Today Satff
How effective has the Bush administration’s foreign policy
been in Iraq and the war on terrorism?
A former U.S. congressman and a former member of President Reagan’s
transition team sparred over that question during a debate Oct.
17 in the James West Center sponsored by the Burkle Center for International
Studies.
Political commentator Bruce Herschensohn, who served in various
capacities under Presidents Johnson, Nixon, Ford and Reagan, praised
Bush for what he called his preemptive vision while Mel Levine,
an attorney and congressman from 1983-1993, criticized the Bush
administration’s “taste for unilateral action.”
Levine also faulted Bush for not promoting democracy and liberty
overseas in an effort to gain the international community’s
respect — instead of its fear.
“Our values and our friends will help us to defeat terror,”
Levine said. “We have hurt ourselves by abandoning both. That’s
what this administration’s foreign policy unfortunately is
known for all too well around the world.”
Herschensohn countered that he believed Bush depended too much
on the international community before acting, citing the lengthy
negotiations leading up to U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441,
which demanded that Iraq disarm.
“I would recommend to always override the United Nations
for one reason,” Herschensohn said. “The United Nations
has the liability of equating democracies with non-democracies.
It simply cannot work.
“Let’s say there were 190 people in a club, and they
wanted you to be the 191st” he continued. “And they
said, ‘Gee these are all your neighbors ... some murderers,
some rapists, some kidnappers, some hostage takers; we even have
slave masters. Want to join?’ ... That’s what the U.N.
is.”
In its place, Herschensohn suggested the creation of a “Nations
of Liberty Alliance,” which would only admit democratic countries.
“I don’t believe you can ever negotiate with a tyranny,
but you can always negotiate with a democracy. If we only had democracies
in the world, I believe we’d have peace.”
Levine rebutted, “I also would prefer that the world consist
of democracies. But it doesn’t. We have to take the world
as we have it.”
The two also disagreed on division within the ranks of the administration.
Levine cited a running battle between national security adviser
Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld over reconstructing
Iraq. Herschensohn responded that there has always been a division
between the Department of State, which he said is primarily focused
on diplomacy, and the Department of Defense, which is responsible
for defending the nation and its allies.
The two men agreed on one point: The American public has lost
sight of the war on terrorism and needs to be reengaged.
“Ultimately, in order to win the war on terror, we need
to influence public opinion,” said Levine, adding that the
administration is failing to remind people “that we need to
win [the war] by allowing our values to resonate around the world.”
The problem, Herschensohn said, is that this war lacks home front
solidarity.
“[During WWII] we were talking about saving a friend of
the United States,” Herschensohn said. “Now we’re
talking about saving the United States and Western civilization.
We better realize the seriousness of this war, and I don’t
give a darn if every cent of mine goes to the government to pay
for the survival of the United States.” |
