Looking back at an article by James Galbraith from a month and a half after the 9/11 attacks (A War Economy... American Prospect 10/22/01), I see that he makes some points that were ignored by the Bush Administration but that still have long-term relevance. One was the fact that a long-term strategy against the new transnational terrorist threat requires a more expansive view of international relations:
The further reality is that the United States needs the sustained support of the world community for diplomatic, intelligence, and military purposes. This cannot be assumed to come for free--especially not from countries that have not benefited at all from the modern global order. A new and more just and stable global financial order will therefore have to emerge from the present crisis or we will eventually become mired indefinitely in fruitless and unending military struggles, with fewer and fewer reliable allies.
We can't say Bush ignored this idea entirely. He had to pay big time to get the "coalition of the willing" together in Iraq. But his Administration has gone so far in the direction of unilateralism that we can say that he went in the opposite direction to this advice.
And it's safe to say that the Enron Republicans have never had any intention of heeding advice like the following, sound though it is:
Finally, there is compelling reason to examine the structural sources of the U.S. trade position. Oil is a major factor; cars are a larger factor still. Reconstruction of our transportation networks and housing patterns so that they rely far less heavily on oil and on automobiles (and on airlines) may be the necessary domestic adjunct of real security abroad. A major national initiative in transportation and urban housing, planned now and launched soon, would also help absorb resources presently being released into unemployment by the private sector.
No comments:
Post a Comment