Wednesday 5 July 2023

“We have met the enemy and he is us"

SHARE

This is the beginning of an astonishing article in the achingly liberal, globalist, Democrat newspaper the New York Times, about Richard N. Haass, the outgoing president of the oldest American foreign policy think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations, set up by the daddy of American liberal foreign policy, President Woodrow Wilson.

It seems Mr Haas, 71, has witnessed a shaft of light before the setting of the sun. 

It reminds me of the mystical experiences that Aquinas and Pascal experienced late in life which they said were worth more than all their philosophy.


Everywhere he has gone as president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard N. Haass has been asked the same question: What keeps him up at night? He has had no shortage of options over the years — Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, climate change, international terrorism, food insecurity, the global pandemic.

But as he steps down after two decades running America’s most storied private organization focused on international affairs, Mr. Haass has come to a disturbing conclusion. The most serious danger to the security of the world right now? The threat that costs him sleep? The United States itself.

“It’s us,” he said ruefully the other day.

That was never a thought this global strategist would have entertained until recently. But in his mind, the unravelling of the American political system means that for the first time in his life the internal threat has surpassed the external threat. Instead of being the most reliable anchor in a volatile world, Mr. Haass said, the United States has become the most profound source of instability and an uncertain exemplar of democracy.

“Our domestic political situation is not only one that others don’t want to emulate,” he said in an interview ahead of his last day at the Council on Foreign Relations on Friday. “But I also think that it’s introduced a degree of unpredictability and a lack of reliability that’s really poisonous. For America’s ability to function successfully in the world, I mean, it makes it very hard for our friends to depend on us.”

He is right, of course, though right for a strange reason. He thinks globalism has failed because it is provoking nationalism and a return to classical geopolitics. 

He is scared of Trump when, as far as foreign policy goes, he should be very scared of Biden and Blinken.

Of course Russia, China, Iran, North Korea are false enemies. The Covid pandemic, of course, was.  I think climate change is too.

I long ago gave up the NYT for the sake of my blood pressure. I owe news of the revelation that Mr Haas received to this blog post, which someone sent to me. The post makes good points, though one cannot take an author very seriously since he thinks September 11 was carried out not by Al Qaeda but somebody else (I couldn't be bothered to research to find out who).

8 comments:

  1. Haas perfectly expresses the view of the US establishment -- the country's real enemy is the portion of the American electorate that does not buy into the establishment's globalist/queer/racialist/de-population/open-borders/suicide-of-the-West agenda and have the temerity to think that the purpose of a government is to protect and advance the interests of its own citizenry, as a continuing society and a culture. In other words, the non-metropolitan white middle class. This is nothing new, it's really been glaringly obvious since the Obama administration.

    Unfortunately, unlike Haas, I see little chance of Haas's "enemy" significantly obstructing the establishment's agenda. Certainly not if they continue wasting time on an aimless clown like Trump. But I tend to think that there's no way, political or otherwise, of saving the US from its own cannibalistic ruling class. Maybe there's some shred of hope for France and Hungary, I couldn't say.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are persuasive but President Trump could stop this second cold war - but I do not think he is electable after the debacle last time.

      Delete
    2. Not only is Trump not electable, he was personally the weakest and least effective president in US history (to the extent his administration was effective, for good or ill, it was due to the mostly establishment Republicans whom he was told to choose to run it for him and did so almost entirely without his guidance). There is no reason to expect that he would perform any better in the unlikely event he returns to the White House. In any event, Haas's view of half the country as the government's greatest enemy is so deeply ingrained among the US ruling classes that the situation is beyond any political remedy.

      FWIW, it is my opinion that the US ruling class is mostly a danger to the American people, not to the rest of the world, and I don't share your benign view of lovely members of the international community such as Russia, China and Iran (though I couldn't care less about Ukraine and its pretty-boy president). However, I don't think it worthwhile to get into a debate on those matters.

      Delete
    3. I certainly don't have a benign view of the governments of Russia, China and Iran but they do not threaten the UK (or NATO countries). I certainly care very much about Ukraine. And the American defence establishment was a huge threat to peace in the Middle East in the last 20 years. A threat to peace elsewhere too and before that.

      Delete
    4. Perhaps he was very ineffective except for his judicial appointments - he was however right about most things, when the political class was wrong. That is something very important.

      Delete
    5. Are you a Trump cultist? He is not 'President' Trump.

      Delete
    6. I said 'President Trump could stop this second cold war - but I do not think he is electable after the debacle last time.' He would be President Trump if he won re-election.

      Delete
  2. 'There seems to be a growing belief in the Russian elites — including many who were horrified by the invasion itself — that the vital interests, and even perhaps the survival, of the Russian state are now at stake in Ukraine. Unlike the Russian masses, these well-informed figures have not been brainwashed by Putin’s propaganda. Most of them see quite clearly the appalling mess in which Russia has landed itself in Ukraine and the terrible suffering inflicted on ordinary Ukrainians. But the only way they seem to see out of it is through something that can at least be presented as a victory.'
    Anatol Lieven
    https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2022/06/06/why-russian-intellectuals-are-hardening-support-for-war-in-ukraine/

    ReplyDelete