Crying Wolf on a Big Scale

Given concerns over our relationship with Bush’s USA, coupled with worries over radical Moslem attacks in England and Iraq, it is worth revisiting how this sorry state started.
Back in 2001 the new Bush administration’s world view was characterised by the following tenets strongly held by the neo-conservatives at its heart:-
The US had a unique opportunity due to its unique power and it had the capacity to project force.
Negotiation was not a part of the process of influence.
Unilateralism meant "do not compromise", hence devaluing the influence of alliances with other allies.
The only threat that could be identified was China
The threat of the rogue states of Iran, Iraq, Libya and North Korea from Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) would interfere with US influence.
Hence Iraq was the focus. "Get rid of Saddam" then influence events to secure Israel’s future and solve the Gulf oil states’ instability. Force regime change elsewhere!
Then 911 happened!
Suddenly USA saw a new threat, rogue states aligned with Al Qaeda. Paranoia set in. US could not defend its cities nor deter this new threat!
The 2002 Axis of Evil speeches set the tone linking Iraq to terrorists, hence they must have WMD, hence the need to attack to defend.
What did US Intelligence think or know? They thought chemical and biological weapons were there but were wrong. They did not think nuclear WMD were there, nor did they link Iraq to Al Qaeda, but were over-ruled.
The Bush administration lied about nuclear WMD and the Al Qaeda link and were caught lieing, hence devaluing US credibility.
So where does that leave things? Well Libya oddly has returned to the fold, Iran has elected a defiant leader, North Korea has ignored the US threats and Pakistan is somewhere in the middle having supplied Iran with nuclear centrifuges bit now being a declared US ally, something that we are not. Iraq is a mess politically and militarily and the US needs a way out.
This will be difficult. The three tolls to fix situations like this are Force, Negotiations and Sanctions and these are not all in good shape now. Remember "Shock and Awe". Well that has certainly devalued the US force capacity as a threat for a while. Negotiations require an ideological change at the centre and this is too big a dead rat to swallow. So sanctions? Well that needs others to be involved and needs the US credibility that it so readily burned when attacking Saddam in the first place.
The US cried wolf and now they have a problem. Did the UK lie too? Probably but even if that answer is no, recent events in London suggest that plenty think that they did.
All this is very pessimistic, deservedly so as the Iraq situation won’t get any better without more troops and the news clips at home of continuous death will drive the US home and then to failure in the Middle East. Oil prices continue to rise and it is getting harder for Blair to commit to further troop activity given the threat at home. Are the Aussies worried? Certainly at some levels they will be.
What can we do? Continue supporting the UN sanctioned Afghan action and quietly support the Iraq civil rebuild will prove valuable as will our independent credibility which sooner or later will come into play as "honest broker".
Why is this important now? Well we have an election, which is being fought with debate at the detailed level of how it affects each of our pockets and fuel prices are a big and growing part of those pocket problems.
The outgoing US ambassador raised the issue and was right to do so. We should see and hear well-reasoned responses from our leaders, free from simplistic slogans. We do have a part to play and so does the UN at some stage, and this is not the only big security risk. There are 19,000 experienced Russian nuclear military staff without really interesting alternative jobs and fifty nuclear sites there that are mostly but not all secure.
How will a coalition that might contain the Greens or NZ First react when and if some of the security worries appear a bit closer to home?
Do our politicians from all sides appreciate what happens when you promise something that you can’t deliver? Hopefully the coming political debate might answer some of these questions, but if TVNZ insists on using one of its celebrities to ask the questions we’ll never know. Bring on Sainsbury.
Wayne Brown