Imagine I made a mistake and showed favoritism to one of my children. A bully showed up and threatened to attack me if I continued to show favoritism. If the bully had threatened to attack me unless I hurt one of my kids, I would do my best to elminate the bully's inclination to ever threaten me again. However, since the bully was advocating the right thing, I would probably feel a sense of shame over my mistake, and do the right thing.
This is analogous to my feelings about the international pressure that caused President Bush to drop the steel tariffs. Bjørn Stærk (Norway) has an interesting summary of some Europeans congratulating themselves over their "balls of steel" and their great triumph over President Bush.
I don't find it surprising that some Europeans are congratulating themselves on the elimination of President Bush's steel tariffs. When one has had such little success in influencing the most powerful nation in the world, it is reasonable to celebrate when one is triumphant. Many of the most strident voices seem to come from the same people who vainly tried to keep Saddam in power. They are naturally grasping onto this victory like a starving man who finds a lone grape in an otherwise empty field. The White House has denied the role of European threats in the decision to drop the steel tariffs, but this rings as hollow as the the leftist claim that Saddam Hussein was not pursing weapons of mass destruction.
I must admit, part of me is slightly bothered that the US caved in to a threat, especially a threat from hypocrites who hide their farmers from free trade even more than we do. Threats are dangerous, especially when aimed at Americans. I believe I speak for the majority of my fellow citizens when I say our normal response to threats is to say "bring it on." Perhaps that is the cowboy in us. A large part of our willingness to fight is having the courage of our convictions. A sizable majority of us are willing to pay any cost for our core beliefs.
So why am I only slightly bothered by our giving in to this particular threat? Economic protectionism is not one of our core beliefs (in fact, the few who usually promote this are usually the ones who believe it is better to allow dictators to prosper than to fight). President Bush was wrong to have ever implemented the steel tariffs and removing them was the right thing to do. I am happy we finally did the right thing even if it took some outside pressure to nudge our President into action.
Now if only President Bush would work to eliminate our farm subsidies. Somehow I doubt the Europeans who claimed they believe in free trade would be glad to see it.
James,
Thank you for a very thoughtful response. This time I may have been the one focusing on the smaller story. I disagree with you about the impact of the threats (I do not believe President Bush would have removed the tariffs without this pressure), but you have raised a serious and valid charge about the extraordinary means used by the EU. I will give this some thought and post more on it later today.
Dear sir,
As for the tarrifs, I am not so sure the threats were a deciding factor in Mr. Bush's decision. I am fairly sure that the actual decision came from the simple fact thjat Mr. Bush was giving in to implicit union demands, which was likely to buy him very few votes on the labor side of the fence, all the while annoying some of his more high minded Right wing intellectual constituencies.
The issue here, as I have argued elsewhere, is the way in which the EU decided to respond. Disrupting, or become part in any fair and open election has always been a long standing taboo in democratic governance. The EU has been stomping on this recently, especially with Austria and Italy, and it seems to be pushing this to America almost as a natural extension of their
This is not how grownup nations behave. You are not only supposed to avoid messing in internal elections, you're supposed to avoid even the int of it. Think of the distup that occured b etween the US and Canada because one minister wondered aloud whether Gore would have been better. Also think of the intense indignation of the EU at the possible Israeli decision to take out Arafat or only deal with anothe elected official. Arafat wasn't even popular or elected, and Europe had kittens at the very suggestion that they not have their intended leader. Clearly, this is not the usual kind of hypocrisy, but an extraordinary one.
[I responded to your response on this issue with a bit of length over at Mr.Stærk's site]