AT a recent meeting with a handful of foreign-policy experts, a senior State Department official lamented the lack of congressional enthusiasm for an indefinite American military commitment in Bosnia. “I’ve got to deal with such a large bloc of isolationists,” he moaned. When several conservative attendees suggested that perhaps these congressmen were motivated not by “isolationism” but by a desire for some evidence that a resolution in Bosnia was at least as important to Europeans as to Americans, the man from the State Department was dismissive: Either you’re with us or you’re against us.
This is the attitude the Clinton Administration brings to almost every major foreign-policy issue. Whether the question before the house is Bosnia, NATO enlargement, an arms-control treaty, an environmental agreement, United Nations dues, Fast Track trade authority, or a bailout by the International Monetary Fund, the Administration boils it down to a simple choice: You can be an enlightened and sophisticated internationalist by supporting Administration policy, or you can take us back to a troglodytic isolationism. There can be no other legitimate opinions about what constitutes responsible internationalism.
Comments