Rifts in the Atlantic Alliance. Plus some news

I will go ahead and direct you to this Asia Times article that I linked to in my previous post. Its such an informative article and I don't think I did it justice by quoting that one part about John Bolton.

To really get a sense of the horrible, horrible state of our foreign policy and the horrible, horrible people who conduct it you have to read the whole thing. I can't do that but I'll give you a few good bits later on in the post.

First some news and interesting blog posts:

Role reversal in the ceasefire debate - billmon comments on the sudden reversal in the US/Israel position and in Lebanons position on a ceasefire. He attributes this - and I agree with him - on the fact that the war has not gone so good. Bush believed that Israel should be 'allowed' to have at it against Hezbollah in the mistaken belief that it would wipe out Hezbollah or seriously weaken it prior to a ceasefire. Israel belived the same thing.

Well it is not going so good and now Hezbollah and Lebanon know that they hold 'better hands' than Israel and the US. They will not settle for a ceasefire such as the French-US UN resolution because it does not address what they want. And, they know very well that they are now in a position to hold out, and demand more.

"But I have to say, the spectacle of Israel's political and military establishment dancing anxiously on the diplomatic sidelines, hoping the U.N. Security Council will step in with a timely ceasefire, while their Arab enemy impassively declares his willingness to keep on fighting, is a sight I truly never expected to see.

To call it the world turned upside down doesn't do it justice by half."

More evidence that the Israel Ground Incursion is not succeding - Few signs that the towns in S. Lebanon are being taken. I might add that, the famous Hezbollah 'center' of Bint Jbail, initially attacked by Israel, is still in the hands of Hezbollah. How the hell do they expect to create a damn 20 km buffer? Hell, Hezbollah has shot Katyushas from areas under Israel's supposed control. If it does reach the Litani river, will the rocket attacks stop even then? To call this a clusterfuck is to be overly nice. Its gotten so bad that...

They are booting the Israeli general in charge of the Lebanon incursion - Someone has to take the blame right? Maybe they should stop to consider that perhaps its not poor command that is behind the lack of succees, but that getting in this situation is where they fucked up. Word also that they will further escalate the ground war...good luck I guess. They best hope they don't dig themselves deeper in the hole.

Now, as promised the Asia Times excerpts:

"Through the course of a single week, the US and France came as close to a bitter split over Middle East policy as they had on the eve of the Iraq war. At issue in the confrontation was a US insistence that an international force (led by France) be deployed to Lebanon prior to the declaration of a ceasefire - a requirement the French thought ludicrous. They weren't the only ones. "

(snip)

"The normally taciturn La Sabliere was particularly enraged when Bolton indirectly accused him of naivety. Responding to a reporter's question about the French position calling for a ceasefire prior to a troop deployment, Bolton was at his arrogant best: "I think it simplistic, among other things. I want somebody to address the problem on how to get a ceasefire with a terrorist organization."

(MY NOTE:Very ignorant for a Ambassador to the UN. Helloooooo. The IRA, the Tamil Tigers (originators of the suicide belt). In fact the Tamil Tigers HAVE a ceasefire with the government of Sri Lanka. Fool. )

"The French, as well as the British, also resented what they viewed as Israel's "high-handed" lecturing of the Europeans on their own constituent problems. The European anger boiled over, according to one UN diplomat, during an exchange between Israeli Ambassador Dan Gillerman and a French official during a meeting on the composition of a proposed international force.

While the diplomat would not recount the words used by Gillerman, he confirmed that the phrases Gillerman used "he repeated in the media". The diplomat was referring to Gillerman's remarks during an appearance on CNN, where he was spurred on by host Anderson Cooper's comparison of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah to Adolf Hitler. "I certainly hope the world understands [that] this war is not just about the safety of Israel or the freedom of Lebanon, it is about preserving civilization as we know it," Gillerman said.

"When you see Hezbollah flags in London and in Brussels and in Paris and you see that most of the demonstrators in Trafalgar Square and in the other cities are Muslims, I would advise these European countries to look very carefully at what is happening in Beirut today because to a very great extent, what they're seeing in Beirut, what they're seeing happening in Lebanon, what Hezbollah has done to the Lebanese people is really just a preview of what they may expect if they don't take care of that problem as they say in this country, soon to be seen in theaters everywhere."

Even the British were enraged: "Take care of that problem? Take care of that problem? What would Ambassador Gillerman suggest we do with our Muslims? That's a hell of a thing for him to say," a British member of parliament sputtered. Bolton's inflammatory statements, US insistence on the deployment of an international force prior to a ceasefire, and Gillerman's offensive hectoring of European diplomats deepened French suspicions over US-Israeli aims at the height of negotiations over a UN resolution.

(snip)

And the most important quote:

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert "bragged that Israel would destroy Hezbollah", a French diplomat said in Washington, "and if he can't do it that's his problem. I don't care what the secretary of state says, we're not going to do it for him."

There are more difficult days ahead - particularly when the US and France square off in the coming week over the draft of a second resolution. With nearly everyone now wondering whether the US position in the Middle East is unraveling, one UN diplomat said the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict may spell the end of an era in which the US and Europe established a tradition of diplomatic cooperation: "We might as well face up to it. Sooner or later the United States is going to have to choose what is more important - its strategic alliance with Europe, or its friendship with Israel."

No matter what the answer to that question might be, the very fact that it has been asked means that the real loser in the current Middle East conflict is the Atlantic alliance.

Damn. What kind of world are future US policymakers (hopefully I can be one someday) gonna inherit from the incompetent fucks who run the show today? Nothing to be very optimistic about.