December 24, 2002 - Denver Post: Former Peace Corps Director Celeste calls it a mistake to focus exclusively on Iraq

Peace Corps Online: Peace Corps News: Headlines: Peace Corps Headlines - 2002: 12 December 2002 Peace Corps Headlines: December 24, 2002 - Denver Post: Former Peace Corps Director Celeste calls it a mistake to focus exclusively on Iraq

By Admin1 (admin) on Monday, December 30, 2002 - 10:25 pm: Edit Post

Former Peace Corps Director Celeste calls it a mistake to focus exclusively on Iraq





Read and comment on this story from the Denver Post that quotes former Peace corps Director Celeste as saying that we need to build an understanding of how "in a big and complicated world" Americans face varied and complicated threats.
"To focus exclusively on Iraq would be a mistake," said Celeste, who previous served as governor of Ohio and ran the Peace Corps.

"Any action that we take in Iraq needs to take into account ripple effects that go beyond the borders of Iraq, that affect not only Israel but Egypt, that affect not only Iran but also Pakistan," Celeste said.

"If we aren't at least sensitive to those potential ripple effects, then we may face both unintended and unexpected consequences that could be severe."
Read the story at:

Iraq not worst threat, experts say Unstable countries viewed as bigger danger to U.S. than Hussein regime By Bruce Finley*

* This link was active on the date it was posted. PCOL is not responsible for broken links which may have changed.



Iraq not worst threat, experts say Unstable countries viewed as bigger danger to U.S. than Hussein regime By Bruce Finley
Denver Post International Affairs Writer
Tuesday, December 24, 2002 - As the Bush administration bore down on Iraq on Monday, competing foreign-policy priorities had experts divided over what threatens America the most.

Pakistan's ruling Gen. Pervez Musharraf - enlisted by the U.S. as an ally against terrorism - faces rising Islamic militancy.

North Korea has moved to restart nuclear reactors that monitors warn could help make nuclear weapons.

Venezuela's political turmoil is still choking oil supplies. Afghanistan is veering toward the volatility seen under Taliban rule, with attackers last week firing rockets at a U.S. base after killing a paratrooper.

"Is this an administration capable of multi-tasking?" said James Lindsay, senior analyst at the Brookings Institution think tank and a former national security adviser under President Clinton.

"There's a real question whether the administration has allocated its time and energy properly among the many competing priorities."

Pakistan, for instance, with its nuclear weapons and topsy-turvy politics, poses a long-term threat to the United States "as severe or more severe" than the threat from Iraq, said former U.S. Ambassador to India Richard Celeste, now president of Colorado College in Colorado Springs.

"Unlike the situation in Iraq where the government would like to have nuclear weapons and the ability to deliver them, the reality is that in Pakistan they do have nuclear weapons and they do have the ability to deliver them," Celeste said.

"We have to be deeply concerned about the safeguarding of that nuclear arsenal."

The risk is that Pakistan's Musharraf could fall, said Celeste, 65, who represented the United States in South Asia from 1997 to 2001.

Anti-U.S. groups in Pakistan gained ground in recent elections, leaving the country's parliament split on whether to cooperate with U.S. forces in the campaign against terrorism. U.S. officials have accused Pakistan of coddling terrorists.

Pakistan also faces allegations it gave nuclear weapons technology to North Korea and Iraq.

Celeste's views reflect a growing consensus that the most serious threat to America in the future may come not from aggressive, attacking nations but from failing nations where, if governments collapse, the resulting conditions can affect people everywhere.

President Bush has said "failing states" are a major problem - though he's now focused on disarming Iraq.

The notion that failing states are most dangerous "is quite right," Lindsay said.

"The problem is that fixing failing states is really difficult to do. On one hand, the president recognizes that failing states are bad for America. On the other, he opposes nation-building."

Erosion from within is the crux of the crisis with North Korea, according to Jim Lilley, who served as U.S. ambassador to South Korea from 1986 to 1989 and visited North Korea's capital Pyongyang in 1995.

"What you have is a Stalinist nation that is bankrupt, the most totalitarian nation on earth," he said. "It is starving because it cannot produce food because of collectivized agriculture. It is very dependent on the United States, South Korea and Japan for its survival."

Dealing with North Korea must be a priority, Lilley said, but "there is not a military option. You must do it differently. The real leverage you have is economics. A military approach would be tragic."

On Sunday, U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, the top-ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said North Korea "is a bigger danger" than Iraq. Biden warned North Korea could have a nuclear bomb within five months.

U.S. officials, meanwhile, are directing a military buildup in the Persian Gulf for a possible war with Iraq. Bush has threatened war if Iraq fails to disarm, and Secretary of State Colin Powell last week called Iraq's latest arms declaration a total failure.'

Colorado College's Celeste said his purpose in citing Pakistan is not to argue against attacking Iraq but to build an understanding of how "in a big and complicated world" Americans face varied and complicated threats.

"To focus exclusively on Iraq would be a mistake," said Celeste, who previous served as governor of Ohio and ran the Peace Corps.

"Any action that we take in Iraq needs to take into account ripple effects that go beyond the borders of Iraq, that affect not only Israel but Egypt, that affect not only Iran but also Pakistan," Celeste said.

"If we aren't at least sensitive to those potential ripple effects, then we may face both unintended and unexpected consequences that could be severe."

To mute anti-Western sentiment abroad, some liberal scholars suggest increasing foreign aid, perhaps targeting schools in countries such as Pakistan, and providing better access to U.S. and European markets.

Others call for a bigger and better defense.

In Pakistan, anti-U.S. forces "are not actually running the government," but "it is not that improbable that the bad actors take control and then are in possession of nuclear weapons," said Tom Donnelly, national security analyst at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.

The emergence of this sort of threat along with Iraqi defiance, he said, "is an argument for having enough military strength to be able to handle both scenarios at the same time."

More about former Peace Corps Director Celeste



Read more about former Peace Corps Director Celeste at:




Click on a link below for more stories on PCOL

Top Stories and Discussion on PCOL
Improvements needed in Volunteer Support ServicesWhere the Peace Corps Bill stands
Dodd's Amended Bill passes in SenateElection 2002:  RPCVs run for office
Peace Corps Volunteers Safe in Ivory CoastA Profile of Gaddi Vasquez
Sargent Shriver and the Politics of Life911:  A Different America
USA Freedom Corps - "paved with good intentions"PCV hostage rescued from terrorists


Top Stories and Discussion on PCOL
GAO reports on Volunteer Safety and SecurityPeace Corps out of Russia?
Help the New Peace Corps Bill pass CongressUSA Freedom Cops TIPS Program
Senior Staff Appointments at Peace Corps HeadquartersFor the Peace Corps Fallen
Senator Dodd holds Hearings on New Peace Corps LegislationThe Debate over the Peace Corps Fund
Why the Peace Corps needs a Fourth GoalThe Peace Corps 40th plus one
The Case for Peace Corps IndependenceThe Controversy over Lariam
The Peace Corps and Homeland SecurityDirector Vasquez meets with RPCVs
RPCV Congressmen support Peace Corps' autonomyPeace Corps Expansion:  The Numbers Game?
When should the Peace Corps return to Afghanistan?Peace Corps Cartoons



Some postings on Peace Corps Online are provided to the individual members of this group without permission of the copyright owner for the non-profit purposes of criticism, comment, education, scholarship, and research under the "Fair Use" provisions of U.S. Government copyright laws and they may not be distributed further without permission of the copyright owner. Peace Corps Online does not vouch for the accuracy of the content of the postings, which is the sole responsibility of the copyright holder.

This story has been posted in the following forums: : Headlines; Peace Corps Directors - Celeste

PCOL1740
89

.


Add a Message


This is a public posting area. Enter your username and password if you have an account. Otherwise, enter your full name as your username and leave the password blank. Your e-mail address is optional.
Username:  
Password:
E-mail: