Document text
http:// --> Ashland, Oregon HOME Valley & State Sports Nation & World Opinion/Editorial Classifieds Business Columnists Obituaries Weather Archive Hot Topics Forum Photo Gallery Past Readers Polls Revels Etcetera Backpage O-Zone Special Sections Real Estate Guide Menu Guide Shakespeare Subscribe Contact Us Rate Card Place an Ad Online Games Movie Preview October 11, 2006 Analysis: An 'axis' that has tilted By Craig Gordon The Associated Press WASHINGTON — To a nation still reeling just months after Sept.11, President Bush's pledge was ominous and direct. He would not stand by while an "axis of evil" — Iraq, Iran and North Korea — grew ever more dangerous to the United States and its allies. Fast-forward nearly five years and the world does look very different. Just not the way Bush intended that day in January 2002. Two of the three "axis" countries — North Korea and Iran — pose a greater threat today than they did when Bush uttered those words, analysts say. And in the one place where Bush did take decisive action, toppling Saddam Hussein in Iraq, that nation is teetering on the brink of civil war as the U.S. troop commitment — and body count — continues unabated. For Bush, it's not bad enough to face a collision of foreign-policy crises less than four weeks before a tight congressional election in which Iraq already is souring the mood of voters. Each crisis also constrains his ability to deal with the others, leaving some experts accusing him of making the wrong choice by making Iraq top priority after his post-9/11 attack on Afghanistan. "It is kind of ironic that if you rank the three countries, North Korea had the most nuclear capacity, Iran was next and Iraq was last in line, so we attacked the one that was last in line," said Joseph Nye, a prominent foreign-policy scholar at Harvard University. That "would be merely amusing if it weren't for the fact that we took our eye off the one that was the most clear and present danger ... North Korea saw us tied down (in Iraq) and they've been able to twist our tail and get away with it," he said. North Korea is back to the top of the agenda this week with claims of a nuclear test, despite Bush's insistence in May 2003 that "we will not tolerate nuclear weapons in North Korea." Democrats seized on the test to accuse Bush of ignoring the North Korean threat by refusing to talk to its leaders since taking office — a position that has drawn criticism even from Bush's father's chief diplomat, James Baker. Republicans argue it was the present Bush's predecessor, Bill Clinton, who did too much talking, getting fleeced by the North Koreans who stalled and went on to build nuclear devices after agreeing with him not to do so. But that's not all for Bush. Three weeks ago, Iran's fiery leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, told the United Nations he had no intention of giving up his pursuit of nuclear technology — defying the world body that now is weighing sanctions against the Iranian government. Bush also has refused to speak directly to Iranian leaders. And while Iraq has been like a weight on Bush's political fortunes for more than a year, last month brought a sobering milestone, being the deadliest month for U.S. troops since April. Bush is pushing for tough sanctions against North Korea and Iran, though it's not clear he'll get them — in part, some say, because anti-U.S. feelings spurred by the Iraq war have weakened his clout abroad. The White House strenuously defends its handling of the "axis" countries, with Bush spokesman Tony Snow calling such criticism "backseat generalship." "The idea that somehow we were not already engaged would be wrong. We have been engaged from the beginning on all of these problems," Snow said. For many foreign policy experts, however, Bush's designation of a band of evildoers demanding immediate action was ill-conceived and overly simplistic — with dangerous consequences, in part because the strategy he set out that day in 2002 has fallen short. "We put our credibility on the line for what may have been an impossible task" of reining in those nations, said Christopher Preble, a foreign policy expert at the conservative Cato Institute in Washington. "You don't put yourself in a position where you can't back your threats." Distributed by the Los Angeles Times-Washington Post News Service Leave a Comment: Advertisement: Advertisement: Paid Advertising Inkjet Printers Student Loans Water Filter Helzberg Diamonds Mortgage Calculator Security Systems Advertisement: Copyright © 2006 Ashland Daily Tidings and Ottaway Newspapers. All Rights Reserved.