Posted on: Tuesday, June 4, 2002

EDITORIAL
Bush doctrine strains benign U.S. image

In a pivotal speech delivered Saturday at the U.S. Military Academy, President Bush expanded importantly on the doctrine he began to develop in the weeks following the Sept. 11 terror attacks.

Bush argued reasonably that the Cold War strategies of massive retaliation and containment were rendered toothless by the evolution of terrorist forces that are stateless and diffuse, and by rogue regimes, which officials said refer to Iraq and North Korea, that may secretly supply those forces with weapons of mass destruction.

He also strongly criticized nations, which officials say include Saudi Arabia and Jordan, that "oppose terror, but tolerate the hatred that leads to terror."

He outlined three sensible objectives of his foreign policy: "defend the peace against threats from terrorists and tyrants," "preserve the peace by building good relations among the great powers," and "extend the peace by encouraging free and open societies on every continent."

But in a striking departure from presidential candidate Bush, who blasted President Clinton's propensity to become "the world's policeman," Bush now asserts the right to take unilateral, aggressive, pre-emptive action when and where he chooses, anywhere in the world.

That seems to include the need to "uncover terror cells in 60 or more countries," or roughly one-third of the world.

Scarier still is Bush's call to impose a universal moral clarity between good and evil upon the rest of the world. Bush must realize that he hardly has a monopoly on moral clarity. One need only look to his steel tariffs or the toughening of sanctions against Cuba to see the blatant domestic political implications of these foreign policy initiatives.

We support Bush's pledge to "promote moderation and tolerance and human rights" in "Africa and Latin America and the entire Islamic world." But we'd hope he would resort to a generously increased foreign aid budget for this purpose, rather than to impose it unilaterally.

Even America's modern, industrialized allies will oppose that sort of arrogance.