Jewish World Review Nov. 22, 2002 / 17 Kislev, 5763

Linda Chavez

Linda Chavez
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
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
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

Bush to Europe: Little Help? | President Bush's visit to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit this week in Prague marks a triumph for a man critics once dubbed a lightweight on foreign policy. This trip -- Bush's 11th abroad -- is a far cry from his first European visit in June 2001.

On his first visit, the Europeans derided the new American president mercilessly. "No one," sniffed the Spanish paper El Pais, "has ever bothered more people in less time."

Most Europeans are singing a different tune this week. The president's role in arguing for the most important expansion of NATO's mission in the alliance's 53-year history demonstrates real leadership. No longer is Bush the foreign policy neophyte but a tested war leader who understands why NATO must change if it is to remain relevant.

The president is pushing for NATO to make the war on terrorism its top priority and will support the inclusion of several new nations into the NATO alliance, including three countries that were once part of the Soviet Union: Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.

NATO was formed in the aftermath of World War II as a bulwark against the expansionist policies of the Soviet Union. Throughout the Cold War, the United States led NATO in keeping Western Europe free. With the demise of the Soviet Union and the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, however, NATO's role has been less clear.

Even as NATO expanded its membership from its original 12 countries to an expected 26 members after this summit, it seemed to lose its bearings as the premier military alliance in the world. Military alliances, after all, are formed to protect members from a perceived common threat. With Soviet imperialism no longer threatening Europe and the world, what need was there for NATO?

September 11 changed that perception, however. If the United States -- the most powerful nation in the history of the world -- could be attacked by a group of Muslim fanatics whose weapons were commandeered civilian airplanes loaded with fuel, what countries were safe? Europe, with its large Muslim populations in countries like France, Germany and Spain, seemed even more vulnerable than the United States. Islamic terrorists have replaced the Soviet Union as NATO's raison d'etre. Unless nations band together to fight this unconventional threat, no Western country will be immune from attacks on its citizens.

Although much of the attention this week will be directed toward whether President Bush is able to garner unconditional NATO support for the anticipated U.S. war against Iraq, the president has another challenge as well. If NATO members, especially the wealthier nations, are to be equal partners in the war against terrorism, their military capabilities must improve. Yet many NATO members' defenses lag far behind, especially against chemical, biological and nuclear threats. Most European nations have not increased their defense spending, even in the wake of this new threat. A new report by a Virginia-based think tank, the U.S. Center for Research and Education on Strategy and Technology, notes that only a handful of European countries will increase military spending in the coming year, while Germany -- a vital NATO member -- intends to cut spending.

For more than 50 years, the United States spent trillions of dollars protecting Western Europe from the Soviet threat through NATO. Now it's Europe's turn to help the United States -- and itself -- remain free from the threat posed by Islamic extremists. President Bush must make this case to his colleagues in Prague and encourage them to improve their own military capabilities. In addition to the creation of a new NATO rapid-response force able to respond to threats to members outside of alliance territory, the president must convince our allies to beef up their military spending. This is a tall order for the man many of these same leaders once disdained. But President Bush has surpassed European expectations nearly every time he's gone overseas, and he's likely to do it again this time.

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

Linda Chavez Archives


© 2002, Creators Syndicate