An interview with Richard Perle [Foreign affairs MUST READ, and I don't say that lightly]

Intl Herald Tribune ^ | 4/12/3 | Richard Perle

[Billthedrill]

Outstanding post, and thank you for finding it for us. Where to begin? You could write a major paper on foreign policy off this interview and not cover everything.

Who's next? Syria, but not necessarily militarily. On the one hand we have troops already in theater; on the other they are not finished in Iraq and there is no need to overextend them. Their efforts to date have been simply incredible, but it has cost them. Syria is now isolated in terms of oil, water, political influence, and funding. We need to ensure that the flotsam from Iraq that has collected there stays there.

If we were to learn, for example, that Syria, had taken possession of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, I’m quite sure that we would have to respond to that. It would be an act of such foolishness on Syria's part that it would raise the question of whether Syria could be reasoned with.

That statement was for Syria's benefit. I personally believe that they have done just that in anticipation of its being moved back once the coast was clear and Blix was back in the saddle. That will not happen now, and Assad is stuck. If it's close to the border, the most likely case, then we may have to turn a blind eye on its being dumped back on the other side. That would be in the interest of allowing Assad to save face, but might be the most prudent thing on everyone's part, especially Assad. Because he knows now that we will take action and nothing he stirs up in the UN will stop it. That is a sea change.

I suspect Chirac's perfidy may well go away when his administration is sent packing, which will happen sooner than many think, IMHO. The Axis of Fools is in no position economically or militarily to oppose the U.S. strategically, and coercing the other nations in the EU to support and especially to fund a French-led effort to do so is now a non-starter. This does not minimize the enormity of the power play he attempted here and calls into serious question whether his administration can be dealt with politically at all. Chirac has serious delusions of grandeur and under other circumstances might have been really dangerous. He will not change.

Saudi Arabia, too is stuck. The old Arab habit of playing Peter off against Paul won't work in a unipolar geopolicital world, and their support for violent, hateful, and irrational Arab nationalism is too much of a pillar of the ascendancy of the house of Saud to be turned off at this point without seriously destabilizing that country. Some have suggested that one of Bush's objectives in Iraq was providing for a secure oil supply in case things do blow up in Saudi Arabia. I do not think that was a principal objective myself, but it is certainly a strong secondary one.

But even our allies are in need of reassurance that this wasn't the goad that finally sent the elephant over the edge into insanity. What needs to be emphasized is that it took 12 years to reach this pass and that we are neither inclined as a people nor impelled by immediacy to continue a military campaign of domination. That always should be, and is, a last resort. The problem is for the protected nations - Germany - and for the protected people - the passionately antiwar left - this has become an impossible option. Where it is so the violent and fanatical will only be encouraged, safe in the assurance that they can shoot, and bomb, and kill with only words for a reply.

One final thought on the EU. I said at the beginning of this and repeat now, this is the point in history where Great Britain will lead all of Europe away from the ossified, mid-20th-century mold in which France, Belgium, and Germany were attempting to recreate it. Britain has by far the freshest political thought, most robust economy, and finest military in that area, and a host of nations newly freed from Soviet dominance have shown themselves quite unwilling to take up yoke and harness for Brussels. If there is a future for the European Union at all it is there.

[Cicero]

Someone asked me the other day, "Who’s going to rebuild everything that’s been destroyed?" I replied by asking, "Should we begin by rebuilding the headquarters of the secret police?" We destroyed essentially military installations and command and control facilities.

In contrast, clinton was said to have destroyed an estimated $100 billion of infrastructure in Yugoslavia, including railroads, bridges, dams, hospitals, apartment buildings, factories, and so on and so forth. I haven't heard the press complain about that, or heard any offers from the NATO countries to pay for the reconstruction of all these essentially civilian facilities. In fact we are still embargoing economic development there.

[Cicero]

The thing is, Chirac is a conservative. If a Socialist replaces him, will that be better? The problem seems to be that France is rabidly antiAmerican across the political spectrum. Even the so-called extreme anti-immigration conservatives supported Chirac's actions.

[MamaLucci]

That really jumped out at me, as well, along with his
suggestion to restructure the UN. The Constitution is
not a living document, and the UN is a dead
organization. Period.

[FairOpinion]

Excellent article indeed.

It also sends a message that we are steadfast in this new policy.

Interesting it appeared in the Internatonal Herald Tribune, it is now fully owned by the NYTimes.

[CyberAnt]

This is a great article!

[bart99]

"Withdraw from the UN. Kick it out of NYC.

Invite other peace-loving nations to join us in a new organization more in sync with reality."

---

Good point. With events unfolding as a result of the war that suggest complicity with Iraq on the part of syria, russia, france, germany - and even our 'allies' Jordan and Turkey..... much less the problems with North Korea and China, I agree. We finance 40% of the UN operations. I think it should be moved to France, or wherever, and a new organization led by the US, UK, Australia, Japan, and a few others, would do more for the world..... and certainly the US. We can o longer operate effectively within the charter of the UN. The world has changed..... so other changes are needed. When other countries decide to change their ways, they can join OUR organiztion. Meanwhile, we should halt all international aid and commerce to countries that "aren't with us". Period.

[maro]

You and others have immediately seized on the "living constitution" comment, which was just a throw-away line, but for the wrong reason. The UN charter in no way is a constitution, or even an articles of confederation. We did NOT create a sovereign when the UN was created, just a diplomatic mechanism for dealing with certain problems. But now that we have the UN, created by treaty by sovereigns and susceptible of being abolished when those sovereigns pull out, a lot of people think silly thoughts such as that we are all citizens of the United Nations. We are not. I am an American; Chirac is a Frenchman; Putin is a Russian. One cannot be a citizen of a political entity without a standing army. The UN needs to be abolished. The world is moving toward trading blocs dominated by one superpower, us. The UN is unneeded, pernicious, a waste of time and money, a fortress for the forces of socialism, cowardly, greedy, and a huge pain in the neck.

[DTA]

>>>>>>Good analysis (considering Perle is a Council on Foreign Relations globalist).<<<<

According to CIA factbook, Iraq has 437,072 sq km, France has 545,630 sq km and Portugal has 91,951 sq km.

Yet, Mr. Perle states that "It was never the role of the inspectors to scour the country looking for hidden weapons. They had no capacity to do that. They were a hundred in a country the size of France and Portugal put together and Hans Blix understood that perfectly well."

Europeans will be rolling on the floor laughing. For German or French reader, Perle destroyed his own credibility.

[DED]

You were absolutely right, this is too important not to read.

One point really stands out, and I haven't heard this point made anywhere else: "The prospect of inspections may have had the effect of causing the relocation of the weapons and their hiding in a manner that would minimize their discovery which I believe will turn out to mean burying things underground in inaccessible places. Given the rapidity of the coalition advance, those individual acts of concealment may have precluded retrieving and using those weapons in a timely fashion."

I kept wondering, what is the point of having WMD's if you're not going to use them when your life and your life's work (Saddam's regime) are threatened? Perle may have explained it very simply.

[DED]

Those of you who are complaining about the comment regarding the 'living Constitution', are you certain that he's not referring to the amendment process and not the reinterpretation of what's already been written and acted upon?

[justshutupandtakeit]

I doubt anyone in the halls of our enemies are rolling on the floor laughing or laughing at all. They are too busy cleaning out their pants and trying to figure out how to get out of their QUAGMIRE of ignorance.

It is unlikely the French or German knows those irrelevent mistakes anyway and even if they do they will not have anywhere near as much glee in the error as you.

[justshutupandtakeit]

They are looking for flies in the ointment but the living aspect of the constitution is the amendment process whereby it can be changed by the present generation as you state.

It is certainly no way as "Living" as Jefferson would have had it.

[justshutupandtakeit]

The Road Map to Peace in Israel runs right over the terrorist training camps. We will destroy them all as we destroyed them in Iraq (at least three that I have heard are.) We will destroy them in Syria, in the Beka valley in Lebanon, Libya, Somolia, the Sudan, Indonesia, Philippines, Iran and any other hole they raise their heads.

Peoples in those countries will owe us one of the greatest thanks ever said.

[EternalVigilance]

The 'Road Map' is DOA...killed by continued support for terrorism and terrorists by the Palestinians, and also by Arafat's continued insistence on not giving even a scrap of power away to the so-called 'Prime Minister'.

The only way power will ever be wrested away from the Egytian Yassir Arafat, the Father of Modern Terrorism, is when it is pried from his cold dead hands.

By the President's own criteria, that makes the 'Road Map' a nonstarter.

Everyone should have figured out by now that our enemy is unappeasable, implacable and impossible to negotiate with. Israelis certainly have learned that lesson.

Syria and Lebanon are one thing, but Israel doesn't need us to take care of their terrorist problem. Meddling there would be one of the worst mistakes we could ever make.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Excellent article, thanks for posting it!

Bush Doctrine Unfolds :

To find all articles tagged or indexed using Bush Doctrine Unfold , click below:
	click here >>>	Bush Doctrine Unfold	<<< click here
(To view all FR Bump Lists, click here)

[justshutupandtakeit]

That was my point. There will be no peace in Israel until the terrorist camps are destroyed and Arafatty's supporters are dead or neutered. When the terrorists who attack them and any rational Palestineans are no more peace has a chance.

Israel can certainly solve this problem when the outside support for their terrorists is destroyed. We have taken two huge steps in that direction.

[nopardons]

BTT

[LibertyLight]

Thanks!!! for the great post ..

LibertyLight's Operation Yellow Ribbon underway throughtout NJ, Manhattan, Queens, LongIsland - wherever we are that day -
So far 250 yards of ribbon @ 2 1/2" width have been placed around - inch by inch everyday...... let's all keep it going...brighten up your neighborhoods late at night and have folks wake to the glow of yellow ribbons!

[KeyWest]

The UN needs a new charter and the essence of the change would be to recognize the threats that arise where national territory is used as a base for support or sanctuary of terrorist organizations, and in particular, when that activity occurs in the presence of weapons of mass destruction.

This needs a lot more thought and definitions. Any nation that has nucs (the US for example) harbors so-called terrorists. Just ask France, Russia, Egypt...

We should not try to reform the UN to get its blessing. It should be reformed to take care of stuff it does well- humanitarian aid- and not stuff it does poorly- nation building and peace making (using troops to take over a country). The US already has the right to act in its own best interests. It does not need the UN.