Assessing the Bush Doctrine

Don’t be fooled by the rhetoric about how dumb Bush is. He is smart enough. While domestic attention has been mainly focused on domestic affairs, the Bush foreign policy team has been busy dismantling international accords that were in their final stages of negotiation. Consider some of them:

• Germ warfare protocol. A 1972 treaty has long prohibited biological warfare, but no enforcement mechanism ever existed. The Bush Administration pulled out of negotiations after years of discussions.



• The Kyoto Protocol. Now, I’m not going to beat around the Bush here, the treaty was literally impossible for the US to accomplish given the current political climate. However, to not even negotiate on the matter signals the world that the US is unwilling to hold a dialogue (and coupled with his reneging on campaign pledges to curb domestic C02 emissions signals domestic environmentalists that he means war).



• The Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty. This is actually a very short and to the point treaty, and the one that some refer to as the cornerstone to security. Again, this is another signal.

These three treaties, as well as the small arms convention, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and the threat to renege on the pledge to remove the US minefields in Korea, mean that the United States’ credibility in dealing with the other countries of this world is rapidly eroding. The most curious fact about this trend is that the White House seems to be following a deliberate line. The Bush Doctrine, as conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer has dubbed it, is American policy.

In a way, the Bush Doctrine is a major ideological breakthrough for the Republican Party. The GOP has long been split between internationalist and isolationist wings, and to go unilateralist seems to satisfy both. We remain involved in international affairs, at least as far as our dictates go, and for trade agreements. However, we refuse to further entangle ourselves in any treaty that would limit our sovereignty or freedom to act, no matter how repugnant. This is a strict ideological game that is being played by our administration, and it makes me angry that Americans are worldwide despised and hated by many people that have never met any of us; or worse, have met the ugly Americans that inevitably tend to be the same sort of people who make those policies.

LAPI, Austen style

Revisionist scholars are re-examining sexual double entendres and other such bawdy themes buried in the works of Jane Austen. Well, what do you think this “tucking lace” business was, anyway?