tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9432583.post111521909985351982..comments2024-01-16T22:44:45.454-05:00Comments on The TransAtlantic Assembly: Capisce, per favore ... รจ difficile essere il hegemonScott M. Sullivanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02806282026211879465noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9432583.post-1115223142299603622005-05-04T12:12:00.000-04:002005-05-04T12:12:00.000-04:00I agree that there is overlap within the genres of...I agree that there is overlap within the genres of style and substance. Having said that, I think that it should be recognized that while there is overlap, the two are generally distinct.<BR/><BR/>I don't believe that the US report is an indication of any style/substance overlap. This is a report that was produced among mid-levels and was designed to be factual in nature. In fact, there were substantial moves by the administration to express its sorrow over Calipari's death. These overtures were largely ignored.<BR/><BR/>To get back to the broader issue. I agree that stylistic differences can have substantive consequences, but I'm not as certain that government policy should stray from what it believes to be the truth to attempt to assuage allies.<BR/><BR/>Maybe the truth should be sacrificed for the feelings of others. I am always amazed how Europeans adore Clinton, the president that assured the death of the ICC, Kyoto and numerous other international agreements.Scott M. Sullivanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02806282026211879465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9432583.post-1115222330970761722005-05-04T11:58:00.000-04:002005-05-04T11:58:00.000-04:00I think that you're probably correct about the sub...I think that you're probably correct about the substance of the report, Scott - as Lorenzo noted, there were almost certainly failures on both sides.<BR/><BR/>Also, don't get me wrong - I was one of the critics who had a field day when members of the US administration landed Blair in it, and will be pleased if this proves to be a strategic error. However, I'm not convinced that your style/substance distinction is entirely sustainable. The point here, in essence, is that style is substance; once again, the US has failed to make a gesture that would have cost them little and eased matters somewhat domestically for their allies. You may well be correct to dismiss the substantive factual issues as being fairly irrelevant; I'm not sure, however, if the - equally substantive - political implications can be dismissed as mere "style".Euan MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06191651493895392340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9432583.post-1115220422769704762005-05-04T11:27:00.000-04:002005-05-04T11:27:00.000-04:00The point I agree with of yours Euan is that I thi...The point I agree with of yours Euan is that I think that this disconnect between American and Europe IS the central issue pertaining to Lorenzo's critique.<BR/><BR/>The actual US and Italian reports regarding Calipari strike me as fairly irrelevant. The US says the car was speeding, the Italians say the soldiers may have been overstressed. Ultimately, I think the real answer is the truth lies in the middle.<BR/><BR/>Honestly, I'm torn as to whether the critique that the U.S. is failing stylistically to wield its power in a way to support its friends is powerful. Part of me feels strongly that intelligent peoples should be able to see past poor style to mine the substance. On the other hand, I am sensistive to the belief that "perception is reality" and as such you make your own reality.Scott M. Sullivanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02806282026211879465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9432583.post-1115219961942289462005-05-04T11:19:00.000-04:002005-05-04T11:19:00.000-04:00There is little to disagree with in that contribut...There is little to disagree with in that contribution, Scott - and yet, it does not seem to respond to the issue central to Lorenzo's post: namely, the fact that the US investigation into the accidental shooting of Calipari has resulted in a total lack of censure of those involved, and the Italian investigators returning home early, refusing to sign off on the finding, citing a "lack of objectivity" in the way evidence was presented and conclusions were reached.<BR/><BR/>It strikes me that there is something of a pattern emerging here: the US is keen to encourage its allies to participate in military adventures that are often deeply unpopular domestically - and yet often seem unconcerned to assist those allies when committed. The UK and Italy both provide examples of this: in the former, at a time when the legality of war was haunting Blair even more than now, senior figures in the US government were openly admitting that WMD was little more than a technical reason for going to war. Blair's critics, and the press in general, had a field day on that and other similar comments.<BR/><BR/>The truth is that the US seems to think that it is so good at influencing people that it need not concern itself with making, or keeping, friends. It remains to be seen if that proves to be a sustainable approach to hegemony.Euan MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06191651493895392340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9432583.post-1115219852067669692005-05-04T11:17:00.000-04:002005-05-04T11:17:00.000-04:00I agree with this point of Scott's "Clinton's diff...I agree with this point of Scott's "Clinton's differences with Bush in matters of European relations and international law was more a matter of style over substance." Clinton knew something Bush does not know, HOW TO HIDE POWER but still very much so use it...Srdjan Cvijichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17554799586994194939noreply@blogger.com