2005-10-19T10:18:00.000-07:00

Clueless in España

We have been gifted with a clear and obvious example of why the United States declined to join the International Criminal Court treaty.

Back in April 2003, during the 3rd Infantry Division's brief search for a competent military opponent between the Kuwait border and Baghdad, a tank came under fire that the crew suspected was originating from the top floor of a Baghdad hotel. They took the building under fire, sending one round into the floor where they believed the rocket had originated. (It should be noted, in passing, that after this single shot by the tank, the enemy fire stopped. One might suspect that this was because the shooters had, in fact, been neutralized.)

Also in the building were a crowd of journalists who were apparently so eager to watch the battle that it did not occur to them that battles are not a safe place to be. Fortunately for most of them, the M1A2 is very good at hitting the target it aims at, so only two of these intellectual heavyweights were caught by the collateral damage.

Two months later, the family and employer of the journalist in question file a wrongful death lawsuit in a Spanish court against the crew of the tank. It goes nowhere, since anyone with enough brain cells to breathe without assistance is aware that battles are dangerous, excrement happens, and if the tank had actually targeted Mr. Couso and his cameraman on the floor below the people who shot at the tank, an entire herd of journalists would have been wiped out.

Fast forward a year. In the wake of the Madrid train bombings (11 March 2004) the Spanish government is defeated at the polls and replaced by a socialist one. The lawsuit rises shambling from its grave, encouraged by the new administration, which apparently either does not have the minimum number of neurons noted above, or assumes that its voters do not and hopes to distract them from the fact that they are abandoning allies and generally doing things that would make El Cid disown the entire nation as honorless cravens.

Judge Santiago Pedraz has now officially made it a criminal proceeding, issuing international arrest warrants for the crew of the tank. The United States will ignore this, of course - the Bush administration has stated previously that any attempt to enforce such a warrant against our military personnel or government officials will be treated as an act of war. Had we been a member of the ICC, however, we would have been obligated to treat this ridiculous bit of grandstanding seriously; and given the makeup of the ICC, there would be real risk of the tank crew actually being convicted of a 'war crime' for defending themselves in a war zone.

As it stands, the soldiers in question will need to be kept out of Europe for the time being (unless the government decides to force the issue) lest one of our European 'allies' be forced to choose between breaking the European Union's rules on extradition requests between member states or having a team of US special forces descend on them like the Wrath of God™. While the latter would probably be amusing, at least from our viewpoint on the western shore of the Atlantic, we probably don't need the distraction at the moment.

The Spanish government may not be able to quash this legally without violating its own constitution - but their Foreign Ministry should at least repudiate the lawsuit and give notice that they will not officially request extradition of the soldiers involved. Until that time, the citizens of the United States should give Mr. Zapatero's economy all the help and consideration that we've been giving to Mr. Chirac's.

2005-10-14T21:58:00.000-07:00

IN THE BEGINNING...

Every blog has to start somewhere. In this case, a definition of terms is probably in order for those who aren't familiar with the meaning of 'Jacksonian'.

The term comes from Walter Russell Meade. He divides the American psyche into four types, which he names after past political figures who have exemplified each type. Each of the four brings a unique attitude to political analysis, based on what they feel is most important.

Hamiltonians are primarily interested in economics. This school of thought is somewhat isolationist, in the sense of wanting to avoid military alliances; they prefer to be involved economically with the rest of the world, but operate in a Realpolitik mindset which tries to keep the peace by making sure no strong factions arise to oppose the US.

The business of America is business.

The Jeffersonians are the most isolationist of the four. They prefer to keep America pure, and keep alive Thomas Jefferson's original idea of a citizenry of yeoman farmers - or at least, the modern equivalent.

... to avoid foreign entanglements...

Wilsonians are the idealist interventionists. Woodrow Wilson's proclamation of the Fourteen Points, his proposal of the League of Nations, the historical missions to China and Africa are all typical of this school of thought.

We fight to make the world safe for Democracy.

The Jacksonians, however, are the archetypal Red Staters. They don't particularly want to get into wars, but if dragged into one will insist on winning, no matter what it takes. They tend to have a rather suspicious view of any self-styled elite. They are self-reliant, but generous to those in need. They also have a rather pronounced sense of personal honor, which expresses itself in several ways. For the purposes of politics, it's a tendency to play fair and to expect opponents to do the same; but if the opposition cheats, they are considered barbarians and after that no quarter is given. They - but I should say we. We are the warrior tribe.

Don't make us angry. You won't like us when we're angry.

So that is the background. If you want another take on it, you can look here. http://www.lts.com/~cprael/Meade_FAQ.htm

The Intellectual Jacksonian