[Peace-discuss] Re: Eminently worth reading

[Al Kagan]

Jim, luckily no relation!

At 2:45 PM -0600 11/2/02, Jim Buell wrote:
>>At 12:21 PM 11/2/2002 -0600, John Wason wrote:
>>
>>This was forwarded to me by a friend in Dublin recently, but it was
>>apparently published in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution; I don't know
>>exactly when.  This is probably the most comprehensive and yet concise
>>analysis of American foreign policy I've yet seen.  Jerry Landay evidently
>>borrowed from it for his Cityview column a couple of weeks ago.
>>
>>Read it and weep.
>>
>>John
>
>Quite an article, alright. A web search shows it originally appeared 
>in the Atlanta paper on Sept. 29, 2002 - 
>http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/opinion/0902/29bookman.html.
>
>Interestingly, that page links to a rebuttal of sorts from Donald 
>Kagan, the chairman of the PNAC 2000 report committee (Al - no 
>relation, right?) - Kagan claims there that the PNAC report has been 
>ignored by the Bushies. Right. Another side link leads to the 
>transcript of an online chat between Bookman, the article author, 
>and various readers. Here's a Q & A segment dealing with the Kagan 
>response.
>
>>Question from Atlanta, Ga.: What is your reaction to Donald Kagen's 
>>article that
>>               dismisses your premises and claims that the Bush 
>>Administration is not
>>               implementing the PNAC Report?
>>
>>               Jay Bookman: I'm glad that Dr. Kagan took our offer 
>>to respond. I want to point out,
>>               though, that "Pax America," with its deliberate 
>>evocation of "Pax Romana," is Dr.
>>               Kagan's term, not mine.
>>
>>               Furthermore, while he claims that the administration 
>>has not followed his group's
>>               recommendations, I find it odd that he fails to cite 
>>such an instance. The truth is,
>>               when you read through that report, and look at Bush 
>>policy, the match is startling.
>>
>>               The real dispute is over the definition of empire. An 
>>American Empire of the 21st
>>               century will not be run or governed as the Roman 
>>Empire of 2000 years ago. But a
>>               nation that reserves for itself the right to 
>>intervene militarily anywhere in the world to
>>               advance its national interests, even without a direct 
>>threat .... well, to my mind
>>               "empire" fits.
>>
>>               I'd also like to mention a 1996 piece in Foreign 
>>Affairs magazine. In that piece, Bill
>>               Kristol, founder of the New Century project, warns 
>>that "conservatives will not be
>>               able to govern America over the long term if they 
>>fail to offer a more elevated vision of
>>               America's international role. What should that role 
>>be? Benevolent hegemony." And
>>               by the way, Kristol's co-author was Robert Kagan, 
>>Donald Kagan's son. So excuse
>>               me if I find the professor's rebuttal a little disingenuous.
>
>
>jb
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Peace-discuss mailing list
>Peace-discuss at lists.cu.groogroo.com
>http://lists.cu.groogroo.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss


-- 


Al Kagan
African Studies Bibliographer and Professor of Library Administration
Africana Unit, Room 328
University of Illinois Library
1408 W. Gregory Drive
Urbana, IL 61801, USA

tel. 217-333-6519
fax. 217-333-2214
e-mail. akagan at uiuc.edu