Clicking on banner ads enables JWR to constantly improve
Jewish World Review June 1, 2000 /27 Iyar, 5760

David Limbaugh

David Limbaugh
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
James Glassman
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Arianna Huffington
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
Michelle Malkin
Jackie Mason
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
MUGGER
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Debbie Schlussel
Sam Schulman
Roger Simon
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports
Newswatch


Legacy-building
idea for Clinton


http://www.jewishworldreview.com -- AS A SENSITIVE, COMPASSIONATE CONSERVATIVE I feel sorry for President Clinton. Time is running out on him, and he still has no significant foreign policy achievement. After all, foreign initiatives are what legacies are made of.

Hold on, you say. What about his triumph in Somalia? His expenditure of $3 billion in aid and commitment of 20,000 U.S. troops to Haiti, only to see its condition unimproved? His incessant cruise-missile volleys against Iraq for who knows what reasons? His bombing of an aspirin factory in Sudan?

His accidental bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade? His innumerable apologies to miscellaneous foreign potentates for America's innumerable past sins? His effort to con the Senate into ratifying his unverifiable and unenforceable Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty? His meddling in the internal election politics of Israel? His rewarding North Korea for their reckless nuclear policies? His undermining of U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq?

His war on sovereign Serbia from 15,000 feet? His unfinished business in the Middle East, the Balkans and Northern Ireland? His reversal of U.S. policy concerning the sovereignty of Taiwan, encouraging Red China to adopt a more openly belligerent attitude toward her?

His relaxation of security to enable his party's major soft money contributor to sell U.S. nuclear delivery technology to China? His refusal to remedy security standards at our nuclear weapons laboratories, despite repeated thefts by the Chinese communists of our most sophisticated nuclear weapons technology?

You get the point. Clinton needs a major breakthrough in the foreign policy arena. How do you otherwise explain his insistence on securing a nuclear treaty with Russia at this late hour in his second term?

Clinton can live with the impeachment "stain" on his record, but it would be too much for him to bear if historians tied his foreign policy failures to his sexual proclivities. That would mean that his critics had been right all along, that it was more than just lying about sex. Indeed an AP story provides a foreshadowing of this interpretation. "With only eight months left in Clinton's final term, however, some experts consider it more likely that he will be remembered not as a bold architect of post-Cold War diplomacy but as a president who, distracted by domestic policy and impeachment, was cautious on international affairs."

Presidential historian Henry Graff agrees that with respect to foreign policy there have been "no really big successes and probably will not be ... They all look for their place on postage stamps and coins at this stage. But I don't really think he can do much."

So Clinton trucks ahead to Russia, hoping against hope that he can reach some miraculous breakthrough with Putin. Clinton is embarking on dangerous territory. Russia's recent offer that both countries reduce their strategic nuclear warheads to 1,500 each has alarmed top U.S. military officers, according to their testimony to Congress.

What is more alarming is Clinton's mindset regarding our nuclear policy. He seems willing to reduce our offensive nuclear capabilities while blocking efforts to develop a comprehensive nuclear missile defense shield. In fact, Clinton is even reluctant to go ahead with a limited national defense system, apparently out of fear that such a system could set off a cold-war-style arms race between China, India and Pakistan. Well, what do you think China, India and Pakistan are doing now?

This is not the same world that existed in 1972 when the United States entered into the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty with the Soviet Union. We were the world's only nuclear superpowers, and strategic stability was based on the premise of mutually assured destruction (MAD) that each of the nations would respond in kind in the event of a nuclear attack by the other. Missile defense could arguably interfere with the peace, by removing the nuclear deterrent.

Today we are vulnerable to nuclear attack by an ever-increasing number of hostile nations. Assuming the questionable MAD policy ever had merit, it is certainly outmoded today.

I have a novel idea for Clinton that could help him with his all-important legacy and enhance the national security of the United States at the same time. He should remove all barriers, especially his own, to the development and deployment of a comprehensive nuclear missile shield.

SDI? Yes, I know it was Reagan's idea, but who's keeping track?


JWR contributor David Limbaugh is an attorney practicing in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, and a political analyst and commentator. Send your comments to him by clicking here.

WND

Up

05/30/00: Clinton: Above the law or not?
05/24/00: Not so fast, Hillary
05/22/00: Gore's risky, fear-mongering schemes
05/17/00: Can Bush risk pro-choice running mate?
05/15/00: Right to privacy, Clinton-style
05/10/00: Patrick Kennedy and his suit-happy fiddlers
05/08/00: Don't shoot Eddie Eagle
05/03/00: Congress caves to Clinton, again?
05/01/00: The resurrection of outrage
04/28/00: A picture of Bill Clinton's America
04/19/00: President Clinton: Teaching children responsibility
04/17/00: Elian, Marx and parental rights
04/12/00: Elian, freedom deserve a hearing
04/10/00:The fraying of America
04/05/00: Noonan: End Clintonism now
04/03/00: Bush: On going for the gold
03/29/00: Phantasma-Gore-ia
03/27/00: Treaties, triggers, tobacco and tyrants
03/22/00: Media to Bush: Go left, young man
03/20/00: Stop the insanity
03/15/00: OK Al Gore: Let's go negative
03/13/00: Deifying of the center
03/08/00: The media, the establishment and the people
03/01/00: McCain's coalition-busting daggers in GOP's heart
02/28/00: Bush's silver lining in McMichigan
02/24/00: A conservative firewall, after all
02/22/00: Bush or four more of Clinton-Gore?
02/16/00: Substance trumps process
02/14/00: The campaign finance reform mirage
02/09/00: President McCain: End of the GOP as we know it?
02/07/00: From New Hampshire to South Carolina
02/02/00: SDI must fly
01/31/00: Veep gores Bradley
01/26/00: The issues gap
01/24/00: GOP: Exit, stage left
01/20/00: Nationalizing congressional elections
01/18/00: Do voters really prefer straight talk?
01/12/00: Media's McCain efforts may backfire
01/10/00: Conservative racism myth
01/05/00: Just one more year of Clintonian politics
01/03/00: McMedia?
12/27/99: Al Gore: Bullish on government
12/22/99: Bradley's full-court press
12/20/99: Bush: Rendering unto Caesar
12/15/99: Beltway media bias
12/13/99: White House ambulance chasing
12/08/99: Clinton's labor pains
12/06/99:The lust for power
12/01/99: In defense of liberty
11/29/99: Are Republicans obsolete?
11/24/99: Say you're sorry, Mr. President
11/22/99: Architects of victory
11/17/99: Trump's tax on freedom
11/15/99: GOP caves again
11/10/99: Triangulation and 'The Third Way'
11/08/99: Sticks and stones
11/03/99: Keyes vs. media lapdogs
11/01/99: Signs of the times
10/27/99: The false charge of isolationism
10/25/99: A matter of freedom
10/20/99: Clinton's mini-meltdown
10/18/99: Senate GOP shows statesmanship
10/13/99: Senate must reject nuclear treaty
10/11/99: Bush bites feeding hand
10/06/99: Jesse accidentally opens door for Pat
10/04/99: Clinton and his media enablers
09/29/99: Reagan: Big-tent conservatism
09/27/99: The Clinton/Gore taint?
09/22/99: Have gun (tragedy), will travel
09/20/99: Hillary's blunders and bloopers
09/15/99: GOP must remain conservative
09/13/99:Time for Bush to take charge, please
09/10/99: Bush's education plan: Dubya confounds again
09/07/99: Pat, savior or spoiler?
09/02/99: Character doesn't matter?
08/30/99: Should we judge?
08/25/99: Dubyah's drug question: Not a hill to die on
08/23/99: Should Dubyah start buying soap ... for all that mud?
08/16/99: 'W' stands for 'winner'
08/11/99: The truth about tax cuts
08/09/99: Hillary: Threading the needle
08/04/99: What would you do?
08/02/99: No appeasement for China
07/30/99: Hate Crimes Bill: Cynical Symbolism
07/26/99: Itís the 'moderates', stupid
07/21/99: JFK Jr. and Diana: the pain of privilege
07/19/99: Smith, Bush and the GOP
07/14/99: GOP must be a party of ideas
07/12/99: Gore's gender gap
07/08/99: Clintonís faustian bargain: our justice
07/06/99: The key to Bush's $36 million
06/30/99: Gore: a soda in every fountain
06/28/99: 'Sacred wall' or religious barrier?
06/23/99: GOP must lead in foreign policy
06/21/99: Crumbs of compassion
06/16/99: Compassionate conservatism: face-lift or body transplant?
06/10/99: Victory in Kosovo? Now What?

© 2000, CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.