Maybe They Just Can't Help Themselves

Sometimes I'm puzzled at what the Bush Administration is aiming to achieve by some foreign policy statement or action. Sometimes I'm pretty confident I get the basic picture. More often, I think I have a good idea what they're trying to do - on those issues I pay attention to, anyway - even if I don't agree with it.

Other times, I just shake my head and think, "What can they possibly hope to gain by this? What can they be thinking?" That was my reaction to Rummy's now-infamous reference to "old Europe" in the build-up to the Iraq War. Since they were trying to win support or at least neutralize opposition among the European nations, how did it make sense to just gratuitously tick people off?

I had the same reaction when I saw this news of Bush's current visit to London:

<< In the speech, Bush also derided France, particularly French President Jacques Chirac, for staunch opposition to many of his foreign policy goals.

<< He said France had long resisted American ideals, noting antipathy faced by the last US president to stay at Buckingham Palace, Woodrow Wilson in 1918, when he arrived in World War I Europe touting his so-called "14 points for peace."

<< "Many complimented him on his vision, yet some were dubious," Bush said of Wilson. "Take, for example, the prime minister of France. He complained that God, himself, had only 10 commandments."

<< He referred to comments at the time made by then French prime minister Georges Clemenceau who said of Wilson's 14 points: "Even the good Lord contented himself with only 10 commandments and we should not try to improve upon them."

<< "Sounds familiar," Bush said to appreciative laughter from an audience well steeped itself in rivalry with France.  >>

Is there an actual point to this kind of gratuitous insult, especially during a diplomatic trip to the country of Tony Blair, who must be Bush's most loyal ally outside the Republican Party?

Tags: iraq war