America as Western Europe

RARELY DOES ONE PRESIDENTIAL election decide the future of the country. Three in American history come to mind: the elections of Abraham Lincoln in 1860, Franklin Roosevelt in 1932, and Ronald Reagan in 1980. It is not clear if the 2004 version will fall into that category. If one gauged the intensity of feeling, particularly on the left, one could conclude that 2004 certainly is such a watershed.

This intensity on the left, as found in the Michael Moore movie and the street demonstrations against the Republican Convention, is, in some part, about its opposition to the war in Iraq and its abhorrence of George W. Bush. Those on the left, the so-called Democratic base, would have the U.S. repudiate the entire Iraqi project and turn it over to the UN--sooner rather than later. The left may know that an American success in Iraq could set the tone of American politics for decades, a tone they do not welcome.

A successful conclusion to the Iraqi conflict would have a great impact on both American foreign and domestic policy. It would reinforce the idea that the U.S. has the capacity to destroy sources of Islamic fascism and its terrorist networks. It would reaffirm the importance of a domestic society that is tough, disciplined, and willing to sacrifice some comfort and ease for the greater good and safety, of all.

Such a role need not require the kinds of military obligations we incurred during the Cold War nor involve an endless succession of military interventions. It would require a sophisticated and flexible military force; a well-trained, covert activity capability with the wherewithal to penetrate terrorist cells: a border security capacity tighter than ever before; and more stringent immigration laws. It would make the imperative of U.S. policy that none of these nightmarish groups should ever get their hands on weapons of mass destruction.

Such a society would be far too disciplined and Spartan for the left. The liberal/left would prefer to use the risk-averse mode of Western Europe as its model. Many of these nations are welfarist in economic policy, libertarian in social policy, and accommodationist in foreign policy. France and now, sadly, Spain are willing to pacify terrorists, accommodate the likes of Saddam Hussein, and avoid any serious use of military force. Even in the Balkans, where conflict was practically on their borders, the NATO countries, save the U.S. and Britain, had little taste for any military intervention that requited sacrifice and loss.

The policies of the French and German foreign ministries, led by Dominque de Villepin and Joschka Fischer, respectively, show a disturbing likeness to those of Britain and France under Neville Chamberlain and Edouard Daladier at the time of the 1938 Munich Conference. In October, 2003, de Villepin and Fischer flew to Iran to persuade its Mullahs to halt the production of material for nuclear weapons. They returned bragging that they had reached an agreement while claiming a diplomatic coup. Since then, reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) indicate that Tehran was engaging in a deception, similar to German Chancellor Adolph Hitler at Munich. In September, 2004, an IAEA investigation concluded that Iran was processing 40 tons of uranium into weapons-grade material. As the Dutch columnist Leon de Winter concluded in the Weekly Standard, "The Iranians knew perfectly well that the Europeans would not back up their demands with force." Hitler understood the same thing at Munich. After centuries of war, tyranny and genocide, it may be understandable that these countries are war-weary, willing to use only so-called soft power (diplomacy, sanctions, UN resolutions) and to seek a haven from wars and conflict.

In domestic policy as well, Western Europe stands in sharp contrast to the U.S. Welfare benefits are more generous: health care is subsidized; education is practically free; workweeks are shorter; and military expenditures are low. They take longer vacations and subsidize industries that have long lost their competitiveness. This relaxed attitude seeps into their social policy. Drag use and out-of-wedlock birth gain little social opprobrium.

There is a price to pay for such comfort and illusions. European levels of economic growth have lagged behind the U.S. for decades: their level of taxation is almost confiscatory; and they ,are stuck with unemployment rates close to 10%. Their lack of productivity eventually will force an end to such a vacation from history. In the meantime, they are willing to let the U.S. take all the risks in fighting terrorism and to receive the brunt of their criticism when things become difficult, as they inevitably will.

The softness and moral torpor found in much of Western Europe is not simply a product of its own dreary history; it also is a consequence of a society hooked on government entitlements that reach beyond the poor and the disabled to the middle class. Such a society disarms personal initiative and takes the spine out of its people.