Clicking on banner ads enables JWR to constantly improve
Jewish World Review Jan. 28, 2003 / 25 Shevat, 5763

Laura Ingraham

Laura Ingraham
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
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Jackie Mason
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Roger Simon
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

The elites versus the voters |

As Saddam continues to play hide and seek, many in the "world community" want to take the opportunity to knock President George Bush off his high horse. In an effort to do this, one prominent politician recently said that America should:

  • embrace "a bold, progressive internationalism that stands in stark contrast to the too often belligerent and myopic unilateralism of the Bush Administration."

  • reject "the narrow vision of those who would build walls to keep the world out" in favor of "forging coalitions and step by step creating a new world of law and mutual security."

  • make "[a] choice between those who think you can build walls to keep the world out, and those who want to tear down the barriers that separate 'us' from 'them.'"

  • eschew the Bush Administration's "blustering unilateralism" which "is wrong, and even dangerous."

  • realize that the Bush approach to foreign affairs "has meant alienating our long-time friends and allies, alarming potential foes and spreading anti-Americanism around the world."

Who said the above? Jacques Chirac? Gerhard Schroeder? Good guesses. But the statements were those of presidential hopeful, Senator John Kerry.

The remarks were part of Kerry's first major foreign policy speech since announcing his likely White House bid. The address is a great window into the mindset of today's liberals. Their strategy should be obvious by now-advocate a foreign policy that favors international institutions over American power, independence, and old-fashioned common sense.

John Kerry concedes that Saddam is a "menace," that he must be disarmed, yet he insists that the US put its own security on the back burner until the "international community" can be persuaded to do the right thing. (Note: the burden is always on the US.)

Yet there is little sign that the international community is interested in coming to grips with reality. On Monday chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix reported that the inspectors recently found thousands of pages of documents hidden in the home of an Iraqi scientist, that some of those papers dealt with uranium enrichment, that inspectors' request for 11 private interviews with Iraqi scientists have all been denied, that the Iraqi declaration did not account for stockpiles of deadly VX and sarin gas. The Blix conclusion: Give us more time to inspect.

According to UN Resolution 1441, passed unanimously by all 15 members of the Security Council, such "omissions" or "misstatements" as those outlined by Blix, automatically constitute material breach, which in turn is to be met with "serious consequences."

Heaven forbid the UN actually enforce its own resolutions.

Given the non-reaction of our UN allies, Kerry's love-affair with multilateralism is either venal or na´ve or both. It is na´ve to think anything except that Germany and France prefer the status quo-they do not care if Saddam is disarmed and would rather have him remain in power. Both countries are more worried about maintaining their sweetheart business deals with Saddam than stopping weapons proliferation.

At what point, using Kerry's foreign policy approach, would it be appropriate for the US to go it alone? What if despite all the evidence of Iraq's failure to comply, our so-called friends in the global village won't budge? Is that still a failure, as Kerry claims, of the Bush Administration?

The more malevolent interpretation is that many of today's Democrats are intent on expanding our reliance on international institutions like the UN because these bodies are inherently more liberal than American voters. Kerry has more fans in Europe than he has in the fly-over states (like Iowa), where he admitted he loathes visiting. Kerry warns of America's reputation for arrogance. Again, that language could have been lifted straight from last year's Gerhard Schroeder stump speech.

Here's the real kicker: Kerry says President Bush's "high-handed treatment of our European allies, on everything from Iraq to the Kyoto climate change treaty, has strained relations nearly to the breaking point." In other words, if we only gave in on onerous emission regulations that would hurt American business (Kyoto) and agreed that our soldiers be subjected to the whims of an global judicial bureaucracy (International Criminal Court), all of Europe would be nicer to us.

On taxes, the environment, and foreign policy, today's liberals are much more aligned with the European elite than they are with American voters. A majority of Americans still believe that our borders should be enforced, that individual liberty should trump international bureaucracy, that American independence should always come before concern about offending the "interdependent global community." Much to the chagrin of Kerry and his compatriots on the Left, the democratic process in the US has not resulted in banning guns, the death penalty or SUVs. This means if liberalism is to get off life-support in the US, it will need to do an end-run around American voters as often as possible. That's where courts, international institutions, non-governmental organizations (the ACLU, ANSWER, etc.) enter the picture.

This strategy is a long-term one, and is supported by media, academic, and Hollywood elites who think most Americans are too stupid to know what's good for them. As much of the world is jealous of American success and power, much of today's Democrat power base is resentful of conservatism's success and power.

Kerry's salvo presents an opening for other Democrats vying for their party's nomination. Will Joe Lieberman rise to the occasion and stand up for American sovereignty? Or will he give in to the pressures of the liberal wing of his party that has more in common with the anti-Americans abroad than it does with the American voters?

In his State of the Union, President Bush should remind all of us that we fought for our independence because we believed that G-d had given us the inalienable right to create our own destinies. Once we give that up, we relinquish our own ability to make and enforce our own laws, to protect our people, to safeguard our liberty. There are countries in Europe and throughout the former Eastern Soviet bloc who still value these principles. They deserve our friendship.

Enjoy this writer's work? Why not sign-up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.

JWR contributor Laura Ingraham is the host of a radio show syndicated nationally by Westwood One Radio Network and the author of "The Hillary Trap: Looking for Power in All the Wrong Places". Comment by clicking here.

01/22/03: Playing (and losing) Homeland Security politics
01/14/03: What have you done for the free world lately?
12/17/02: Who is the better leader: Gore or Lott?
12/10/02: Who, more than anyone else, is actively advancing the cause of civil liberties around the world?
12/04/02: 'Tis the season to hope for the worst
11/27/02: The Federal P.C. Police Versus Small Business Owners (Cont'd)
11/19/02: Bipartisan moves to reward illegals
11/13/02: Eminem, a rebel? You gotta be kidding!
11/05/02: In defense of low turnout
10/30/02: Hell, no they won't go!
10/22/02: Where are the moderate Muslims?
10/15/02: California dreaming, cont'd
10/08/02: Slick Willie's running
10/01/02: Euro-worries about wall flower status
09/26/02: How lucky we are that the Straight Talk Express drove off the cliff!
09/18/02: What Jackson and Sharpton know about conservatives
09/12/02: The Today Show v. guns
08/27/02: Bush not attending the UN-sponsored "bash Amerika" conference!?
08/20/02: The NEA: Let the anti-American indoctrination begin!
08/13/02: Bubba's revenge
08/07/02: Bilingual bust continues its drag on our schools
07/30/02: Dems love for big lawyers=big opportunity
07/23/02: No time for vacation
07/16/02: Is Homeland Security all wet?
06/25/02: The firing season has arrived
06/18/02: Picking the next chief
06/11/02: Intelligence coup, with much more to do
06/07/02: The Bush administration's foul ball
05/30/02: Post-feminism in the aftermath of 9-11
05/23/02: The press gunning for Ashcroft
05/19/02: El Jefe basks in Carter's Light
05/15/02: Former presidents who don't understand the word "former"
05/07/02: Ozzy deified, many mortified, drugs glorified?
05/01/02: Bush: "California here I come ... sort of"
04/27/02: The good news about conservatives versus Bush
04/17/02: While the cat's away....
04/09/02: Preview of 2004: See how Dick runs!
01/29/02: A kinder, gentler human-rights violator?
11/27/01: Military tribunals provide streamlined justice
09/07/01: Scariest animal wears pants
08/17/01: Depressed after seeing uncut version of Apocalypse Now --- and for good reason
07/20/01: The other, maybe more important, news
06/22/01: Washington's pro-Bono worship is unnerving
06/01/01: Burying conservatism
05/17/01: Ashcroft's abuse of power

© 2002, Laura Ingraham