Lessons from Dearborn

 When the hijacked planes pierced themselves into symbols of America on the early morning of September 11^th, 2001, the mayor of Dearborn, Michael Guido immediately called his police officers and representatives of the Arabic –American community together.  There is a possibility that shocked Americans will turn against the Muslims in Dearborn, he told them.   Dearborn is a town of 100,000 inhabitants with the highest percent of Arabic-Americans in the country.  

The mayor sent all the police cars to the “Arabic district” to be sure that nobody from outside that area took action against the local community. The mayor quickly traveled to to the local radio station. At 13.00 hour he is went on the air.

“Arabic-Americas are just like me real Americans.” He told the radio audience.  “They also built the city and made it thriving. I am proud of them. And everybody should know that an attack on one Arabic-American is an attack on everybody in Dearborn. I expect,  as a non-Muslim that you reach out your hand to our Muslim neighbors. Talk to each other!”  

When the mayor walked out, CNN and other TV broadcasters were already driving through the town. But nothing happened.  Absolutely nothing.  People from Human Rights Watch, the human rights organization, listed five hundred hate crimes against Muslims in the country.  According to the organization the good relationships between the different groups provided an ‘adequate buffer’ even to counter a crisis the size of ‘9/11’.

PROUD

meet the proud mayor in his office at the town hall. Recently he was reelected for the fifth time with more than 80% of the votes.  The murder of Theo van Gogh, he told me, was in the news in Dearborn for days.  “As a mayor I monitor closely such events in a tolerant and multicultural country as the Netherlands.  Not that I have to be afraid of radical imams. The FBI is monitoring the few we have very closely.  And having said that,  most of the Muslims are moderate”. 

To boost the integration process the mayor is pointing towards employment.

“Unemployment here is under 4%. Every immigrant should have a job as soon as possible, Honest, simple work. A steady job. Even the more than ten thousand refugees who arrived from the Iraqi countryside with not much education, have a job. They do not speak English fluently but our local aid organization Access – with hundreds of volunteers - is giving special courses “workshop English’.  They are learning special words and you have to know the safety procedures to understand the production process.  To learn more of the language they come one hour to work an hour early to have their lessons and stay on one hour longer to study”.

“I want the immigrants to feel first of all real Dearborners.  They have to have a good relationship with their neighbors. Knowing what the rules are. For practical things like when the garbage is being picked up, we have made leaflets in Arabic. And of course, the national citizenship test is very important. They have to speak a far amount of English and know something about American history.  They really enjoy it when I as the mayor am present at the Swearing in ceremony.   It is a real party. The whole family comes.  They are proud as peacocks. They are American”.  

The mayor is widely seen as a smart politician.  He appointed Joe Beydoun, a popular figure within the Arabic community, years ago as his chief assistant. So he knows exactly what is going on. 

At the end of the 1990’s  Arabian-American youth were driving around town honking  when the South of Lebanon was freed. That could have easily gotten out of hand because some of the inhabitants were irritated.  “I gave them a street in the center for a couple of hours  where they could have their party. “ 

Joe Beydoun gave Guido good advice more than once.  On a day during Ramadan the mayor was the host of a special ‘sunset dinner’ to break the fast (President is now also doing it). Approximately a thousand people were present.  The mayor personally wished them a good Ramadan. And this year they developed a calendar also listing all the Arabic holidays. “A gesture of respect which does not cost much extra effort”. Guido said.    

When we said goodbye the mayor told me to drive along Warren Avenue to get some impressions.  It is like driving on a street in the Middle East. All the shops have texts in Arabic. Joe advised me to stop at the ‘New Yasmeen Bakery” one of the many Lebanese bakeries. It is a popular strip mall restaurant   I am in line among the “headscarves” and white businessman. Everybody seems to know what choice to make out of the many goodies of bread, meat and vegetables. When it is my turn, I am stuttering, “What is this?” I point towards something that looks like potato salad. A robust white American lady behind me saves me. “That is humus. Everybody adores it as a starter. A sort of puree of chickpeas with some oil and lemon juice.”  

Training 

I continue to talk a bit longer with this very friendly woman - Louise. I tell her that I am from the multicultural society the Netherlands. She is interrupting me immediately. “And then you do not know what ‘humus’ from the world famous Lebanese kitchen is?  That’s the kind of fact that we are learning at ‘diversity training’, something a lot of companies make compulsory for their staff.  You really need it as a sales person in a shop. Lots of my colleagues are Arabic-Americans and also customers. So instructive and so much fun. On the job we have a discussion group every couple of weeks to learn about cultural and religious differences, but also that we have a lot in common. Our happiness, our worries, our sorrows. “ 

When we say goodbye, Louise shows me her business card,  on one side it is in English and on the other in Arabic. 

She is asking me if I would like to attend the Martin Luther King dinner that night? Than I can learn something of the integration in Dearborn.  

Grant 

The evening was organized by the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Center. They held a writing competition for high school students.   They were asked to write a script  about the influence of Martin Luther King on today’s youth.  I do not only see a lot of Arabic-Americans but I also see a lot of black American’s and white people.

They are playing the national anthem before dinner and they all sang at the top of their lungs.. After that everybody kept on standing to sing the semi-official anthem of black America.  

The choir of the winning “Riverside School’ is marching in. I see children black and white and some of them with a headscarf.  Louise tells me that nobody is bothered.  

‘Individual freedom is sacred for us and the individual symbols fit in with that. Like Jewish people have their yarmulke. 

The black moderator for the evening Fanchon Stinger, a local broadcaster takes the podium.  

The torch of Dr. King tonight will be passed on to the youth of Dearborn. I am a black woman, but the nonviolent social battle of Dr. King is also intended for all people of different religions and everybody in underprivileged neighborhoods.  I am proud to be an American. In this country nobody can be judged by the color of his skin, his sexuality or his religion.   Diversity of people gives strength to America.  

There is a thunderous applause and the winners are shining with pride. American’s love to throw prizes, certificates and honorary titles.  I can see that this can be very inspiring especially for young kids. One of the winners Amy told me:” When I was working on my paper I could feel the influence of Dr. King and now I won the price I will do continue to do my best to realize his ideals.  

After one day in Dearborn I imagine myself on another planet. Obligatory diversity training, black role models who are also honored by the Muslims. Citizenship tests to which immigrants would love to join.  What strikes me most is the relaxed way that the people deal with those differences. 

Forced   

One day later I meet with Nasser Beydoun, a successful businessman in a (of course) Lebanese restaurant. Until recently Nasser was the Director of the Arab-American Chamber of Commerce. Recently he stayed a couple of days in the Netherlands where he spoke with Muslim youth. One of the first things he noticed was that Turkish and Moroccan youth are not proud of the Netherlands. “I think that that has to do with the fact that the Netherlands is a strongly homogenous culture.  But you should not be afraid of diversity.  This is totally enriching,” he said.   Nasser thinks that the Dutch politicians should not lecture so much, but should facilitate more.  “The Muslim community is the first line of defense against extremism. Give the people the feeling that they belong there. Especially the first – and second generation of immigrants should have government jobs like policeman and fireman. A steady income. That will give authority within the community”.  

“The government should set an example”, Nasser says. “At our annual big Arab-American festival, that attracts more than one hundred thousand people, there are all kinds of stalls in town.  There is also one for the CIA, who are there openly recruiting people from the local community. And there is an enormous queue for that stall”.  Nasser thinks that education is important.  “Ignorance is a big proble

m and breeding ground for fundamentalism.  When there is no fuel,  there cannot be an explosive atmosphere like there is now in the Dutch cities.  People who are living in disadvantaged neighborhoods should have good schools. Give the talented youth who is living there some extra places at university like we do here”.

“Of course new immigrants should respect the law,” Beydoun continued.  “They should not be allowed to wallow in a role of victim. Talk to them about their own responsibility, but always in a respectful way. Give them the right to assimilate completely or to make a life for themselves within their own community”.   

Nassar is not in favor of forced integration, which some Dutch politicians have suggested.  “That is at right angles to individual freedom,” he said.   “A enforced policy of relocating immigrants around to country in order to avoid them all gathering in the same area does not work.”   In the last hundred years Dearborn had waves of mostly Lebanese, Yemenite and Iraqi immigrants.  When the government placed them in different part of the country sooner or later they all came back to their old and trusted Dearborn”.  

“Only when people became middle-class do they went to live elsewhere. That can take four to five generations. Dutch people should have more patience.  I understood that a lot of the Moroccan and Turkish people have been living in the Netherlands for only twenty or thirty years”.  

Nassar has to end the conversation. He has to go to San Francisco for business. Customers, also white Americans, who are walking by our table, are greeting the youthful Nassar with a kind of respect.  I am comment that he is a role model for a lot of them 

I am driving to my last appointment. Via Warren Avenue I get to a side street where they are building the biggest mosque of the United States, who is nearly finished.  But striking is the fact that on both sides there is a Christian church and a Jewish synagogue. ‘That is the power of Dearborn”, Eide Alawan, an important adviser of the well-known imam of Dearborn says. Eide works at the ‘New Islamic Center’ which aims to improve relations between religions and cultures.
”Because of the Palestinian matter things are not going well between the Islamic and Jewish community here. But 9/11 brought the people closer to each other. That same day I invited the rabbi to come here. We had to do something with other religious communities.  That man had never seen a mosque.”  

“A few days later we organized a religious service. We went in my car. I sat behind the wheel so the rabbi, the vicar and the imam could sit in the back and talk to each other. During the service which was visited by more that a thousand persons, we broke bread together.  And the three clergymen each said a prayer”.  

“And that was just the beginning. Jews, Christians and Muslims all have Abraham, as their common earthly father. The youth did a play together: ‘the children of Abraham’.

The similarities between the religions of the world were well represented.  It was a huge success.  Ten thousand persons attended the play”.

Eide sees Islam as the religion of peace.  “We do believe that our people are divided consciously into separate tribes and nations to emphasize the strength of the diversity. Every human being has the duty to broaden himself to learn in order to learn about others”.  

Eide also was shocked by the assassination of Theo van Gogh. . “Now there is fear in your society, there are also changes. You had your ‘9/11’ moment that can bring all of you closer together.  I think that you should give the more moderate imams the chance to speak. And there will be some of the Dutch people who are converted to the Islam Their roots will be always within Dutch society and they know the moderate side of the Islam. Give them the chance to talk on television. These are the people who can build bridges, who can foster understanding.  They have to point out that some people are politicizing the Islam and giving the wrong explanation”.  

Eide insisted on showing me something of Dearborn. We drive towards the town hall. We park there and walk across the street where they are building a big museum. Eide is telling me very proudly that this is the first Arabic-American museum in America.  “We are showing the history of the immigration,  but also about other immigrants. And we explain what the Arabs did for Algebra and also for medical science.   There will be a hall showing the accomplishments of famous Arab-Americans from politics, science and sports”. 

I say goodbye to Eide, who made a impression on me with all his kindness.  When I drive away, he yells at me: ”Think about Abraham’s children. A universal concept and mutually understanding is the only way to live together.  We should be working towards that, every day. Everybody has his own responsibility.  You also”! 

What an idealist. What a moralist. But he is convincing. When I pack my suitcase I am thinking about the museum. Such an immigrant museum could arise in the Netherlands.

A museum about Chinese peanut farmers, Italian ice-cream salesmen, Turkish and Moroccan immigrant workers who came to us because we asked them to come. The first role models for the youth are already there. Our youth is very fond of the Moroccan-Dutch singer Ali B. We have politicians from all kind of cultures. In the world of sports allochtonen persons are shining.   As far as I’m concerned, the first stone has been laid. Thanks to Eide and thanks to Dearborn

Back

We can learn a lot from America

02/23/2005 DE VOLKSKRANT (page 11),one of the Dutch leading newspapers

US President Bush emphasized last Monday the value of tolerance.  Many subjects which dominate the multicultural discussion in the Netherlands, are absolute non-issues in America, says Willem Post. 

And then, out of the blue, there was this phrase about “violence” in the Netherlands and the importance of tolerance for “our nations” in President Bush’ speech. (De Volkskrant, February 22, 2005). Bush wants to confront us with the fact that we can learn a lot from tolerant, multicultural America.

Especially us Dutch middle-aged and up tend to forget that we were largely raised in the narrow-mindedness of our sectarian groups. That had a huge impact on our lives.  Because of these divided groups we hardly came into contact with other cultures and religions.  Take my Protestant parents, for example.  They had Catholic friends and as a child I already sensed that was very unusual, something many people considered “not-done.” 

At our Protestant schools, we did not learn much about other religions and cultures.  And I do not think it was any different at Catholic schools.

We did travel to other countries, but those were Dutch organized tours to the Italian flower Riviera.  The trains were loaded with Dutch cheese and Dutch potatoes.  I cannot remember that we were willing to explore Italian culture and religion more in-depth.  Dutch billboards and neon light commercials popped up everywhere along the Riviera and the Spanish beaches

For decades we Dutch people were very thrilled by sun tan oil and Bacardi-coke.

From a multicultural perspective, millions of Dutch people middle-aged and up are lesser equipped - because of everything they lacked in their youth - than people elsewhere to really meet those with a different cultural background. 

But now the situation has changed.  Now, people in their twenties are backpackers, exploring the jungles of Asia, Africa, and South America and they are looking for interesting ‘new’ cultures, while their parents, often still vital, hibernate at the Canary Islands or spend time safely and leisurely in totally westernized idyllic spots such as ‘American’ Aruba or Cancun in Mexico.

This group of young travelers, the Internet generation, can therefore handle the multicultural discussion much better.  I advise members of my generation to take a multicultural hiking tour through the United States.  I am convinced that many will draw the conclusion that they are on another multicultural planet.Many issues which dominate the multicultural discussion in the Netherlands so negatively, are absolutely non-issues in America; and quite rightly so!  It is no less than plain racist to talk about “black schools.”  And forcing integration is nonsense.  Someone who is born and raised in the U.S. is integrated. That’s it!   It is considered anti-social to speak about “allochtones” and “autochthones.”  For this is not the way to create an ‘all American’ feeling.  In the U.S. one has every right to assimilate, but also the right to stay within his own culture and traditions for generations (China town, etc).  Wearing a headscarf is fully accepted by society, because attacking this right goes against individual liberty.  Americans thought that the difference between autochthones and allochtones is totally irrelevant.

How surprised the Dutch people of middle-aged and up would be when they see what is happening in Dearborn, the town next to Detroit and called the Muslim Capital of America, with the highest percentage of Arabs outside of the Middle East.  Human Rights organization Human Rights Watch saw that in the weeks after 9/11 everything was quiet, especially in Dearborn, because of the excellent harmonious relations between all kinds of religions and cultures.

Italian-American Mayor Michael A. Guido is not really worried at all about a few radical imams in Dearborn. “That is a case for the FBI.  I aim at the large majority of moderate Muslims.  During Ramadan I organize a sunset dinner to wish my Muslim citizens a Happy Ramadan.  I want to be a bridge builder.”

Hundreds of volunteers teach language courses, “working English,” so that newly arrived immigrants can find a job.  Unemployment is under 4 percent. Many companies have mandatory diversity training programs.  Caucasian people are sincerely interested in learning something from other cultures.  They are curious.  They present business cards in English and Arabic. “That is okay. For half of our colleagues and customers are Arabs.”

And that is multiculturalism, in Dearborn.  They keep saying: “O yes, Holland, the country of Theo van Gogh.”  A professor says: ”In Holland you are so entangled in a shouting game.  Where are the moderate forces in your society?  Here, if radical Imams or radical filmmakers would say what they said in your country they would, at once, have become irrelevant to the general debate.  If they do not call for violence, they would still be allowed to open their mouths, but nobody would listen to them any more.  Respect for other people is sacred for us.  For us every individual counts.” 

An Arab-American organization organizes a Martin Luther King dinner, because the black vicar is also a social-spiritual role model for other cultures and religions.  The dinner starts with the national anthem, sung at the top of their lungs.  After that follows the non-official “black” anthem of America.  There are many Black, Arab, Hispanic and White Americans.  They talk to each other and pat one another on the back.

Local Muslim leader Eide Alawan stages the play “The Children of Abraham.”  With Jewish, Christian, and Muslim youth.  Tens of thousands came to the play.  “There are so many similarities between the religions of the world,” says Eide.  “Maybe an idea for the Netherlands?”

The Mayor mentions the national citizenship test.  “People have to speak reasonably good English and must know something about American history.  They love it when I, as the Mayor, attend their swearing-in ceremony.   It is a real party.  The whole family comes.  They are as proud as peacocks. For they are Americans!”

A party? People happy to naturalize?  Here, too, that would require true mutual respect in a relaxed atmosphere.

All of us cannot go to Dearborn. And anyway, what should they do with so many ignorant Dutch?  Let’s start with diversity training for white people over forty. Voluntary training.  If the multicultural drama continues you can always make it mandatory.

Willem Post (49) is an America specialist.  He recently visited Dearborn, Michigan.

Back

The Great Misunderstanding of Yalta

The Yalta-conference took place at the Crimean-peninsula from the 4^th through 11^th  of February, 1945. The Nazis were in the process of withdrawing their troops from the occupied countries and Adolph Hitler had only three weeks to live. The ‘Big Three’: Franklin Roosevelt, Joseph Stalin and Winston Churchill, reached an agreement about several complicated issues, shaping the future of Europe. America-expert Willem Post reflects on one of the most famous conferences in history.

Just before president Bush made his journey to Margraten in Dutch Limburg in May 2005 to honour the victims of the Second World War, he was in the former Soviet Republic Letland. In the capital city, Riga, he spoke some tough words about the Yalta conference, placing it in the ‘unjust tradition’ of former conferences like the ‘Betrayal of Munich’ in 1938. ‘Like so many times before,’ he said, ‘the great nations decided the destiny of smaller countries, and, as a consequence, years of oppression followed.’ It was a clear signal to Russia.

President Bush also spoke about a new tyranny. He criticized the scourge of terrorism in the world and made it clear that he sincerely believes in the strength of democracy and that he most certainly would stand for democracy in the Middle East.

By putting Yalta and Munich in the same category and connecting them with modern evil, the US president placed great historical figures like Roosevelt and Churchill on the “bad” side of history, agreeing with critics who compare Yalta to the sell-out of Eastern Europe to Stalin.

Roosevelt is considered the main suspect, or even perpetrator of these “crimes”. Some historians say the worldview of FDR was too naïve, his foreign policy soft and “Wilsonian”.

But his high ideals were legitimized by international law. Like his predecessor, he was obsessed by the idea of a world government. His United Nations, a better version of Wilson’s League of Nations, would be a world government whereby the great powers The United States, the Soviet Union, France and Great Britain would have their sphere of influence. The harmony between the great powers would enable many things, even an international police force with a mandate to intervene early, as Roosevelt tried to convince Stalin at Yalta. 

They also said Roosevelt had a great trust in Stalin. In 1942 Roosevelt wrote to Churchill: ‘I hope you don’t think that I am too impertinent when I tell you that I can better handle Stalin than you. Stalin hates the strange habits of diplomats at our Departments of Foreign Affairs. He likes me more and I hope he will do so in the future.

’At Yalta, in the beautiful surroundings of palm-trees and luxurious hotels on the Black Sea, the Americans tried to comfort Stalin. Roosevelt absolutely didn’t want to be seen alone with Churchill. No Western tête-á-têtes! When the leaders came together, Roosevelt told all kinds of teasing yokes about Churchill’s British peculiarities and they laughed about his big cigars and drinking habits.

An observer wrote that Churchill’s face ‘coloured red’ but that there was definitely a pleasant atmosphere. Sometimes it seemed as if Stalin and Roosevelt were brothers; as if Roosevelt recognized a partner in Stalin and together they would deliver a social New Deal for the ordinary people; capitalism and communism would come together. In his own country Roosevelt was known by his adversaries as ‘the red man in the White House’.

Roosevelt talked extensively with Stalin about the scourge of colonialism and it was the primary reason for the strained political relations between himself and Churchill.

The United States liberated themselves from British colonial oppression. Regarding the ‘old fashioned colonial’ Churchill, Roosevelt said: ‘After the war millions of people will return to a way of pseudo-slavery.’

In the days of Yalta, FDR consulted with the Dutch Monarch, Queen Wilhelmina, with whom he enjoyed very good relations also due to his Dutch heritage, and, via her, tried to influence Churchill.

In a triumphant mood he told his son Elliott: ‘Finally I got her talk about the Dutch colonies. She promised me that, immediately after the defeat of Japan, the government would announce that she would give the peoples of the Dutch East Indies the “dominion status” with the right to govern themselves, and that she would pressure the British to conform with our guidelines in colonial affairs. It is all connected: The Dutch East Indies, French Indochina, India and the British extra-territorial rights in China. We shall finally succeed in turning this century into the twentieth century. Mark my words!

Such remarks are proof of idealism. By standing up for oppressed people in a world still very much characterized by colonialism, Roosevelt was on the “good” side of history, by proposing a United Nations he wanted to prevent future wars.

One of the most popular memorials in Washington DC is the Franklin Roosevelt Memorial, opened in 1997. An impressive text between the statues reads:

‘I have seen war. I have seen war on land and sea. I have seen blood running from the wounded. I have seen the dead in the mud. I have seen cities destroyed. I have seen children starving. I have seen the agony of mothers and wives. I hate war.’

If we portray Roosevelt only as an idealist we bring injustice to his legacy. Roosevelt was also a great political tactician, who was elected president four times. In times of high unemployment and a strong isolationist movement in Congress he succeeded step-by-step in bringing his country closer to the Second World War. He successfully lobbied for the ‘Land Lease Bill’ so that Great Britain could get a sufficient amount of arms in the crucial first years of the war.

Roosevelt was convinced that he had almost nothing with which to pressure Stalin at Yalta. At the Italian peninsula and in Western Europe the invasion of the allies was delayed after the failure of the Battle of Arnhem. In the war against the Germans, the Soviets had lost millions of soldiers and they occupied large parts of Eastern Europe. Churchill had already cut a deal with Stalin to keep the British influence in Greece in exchange for a Russian sphere of influence in Eastern Europe. In February ‘45 it seemed it would take a long time before the Japanese would capitulate, and it was Roosevelt’s top priority to convince the Russians to get involved in the war in the Pacific. The atomic bomb had not yet been successfully tested. Roosevelt needed good relations with Stalin—he needed his support for the United Nations.

Roosevelt knew that Churchill had already has started his own charm-offensive on Stalin, whom he had called ‘his Bear’ in a private meeting. Strategically already moving to the post second world war era, Churchill wanted to maintain the British sphere of influence at any price.

But Roosevelt was convinced of the fact that he was the superior politician by developing a personal relationship with another world leader. In his own country he toyed with his adversaries, like children’s playthings. With his political acumen, rhetorical skills and sunny smile, FDR succeeded in capturing everyone. Friend and foe alike were invited on a regular basis to his private Hyde Park mansion in the romantic Hudson Valley. Even an experienced general like George Marshall didn’t dare attend such a dinner after a difference of opinion. In an informal atmosphere he would no doubt be influenced by the charms of Roosevelt, as he wrote in his memoirs: ‘Roosevelt puts his arm around you and automatically a warm conversation starts. Irresistible!’ Isaiah Berlin once said about Roosevelt: ‘He had all the character and energy and skill of the dictators, and he was on our side.’

Stalin admired Roosevelt. About Churchill he said: ‘He is the kind of person who’d pick a penny from your pocket if you didn’t keep an eye on him. Roosevelt is different. He only wants to have the big things in his hands.”

Roosevelt got several concessions from Stalin. He agreed to the United Nations and dropped the demand that all 16 Soviet-republics, each apart, would be member states.

In turn, Stalin got his concessions. Eastern Europe would stay within the Russian sphere of influence, although Stalin signed a declaration with great words about freedom. Regarding Poland the text explicitly stated that a ‘broadly constituted provisional government’ would come in power. ‘Free and unhampered elections should take place as soon as possible on the basis of general suffrage and secret ballot.’

This promise, as we all know, was trampled on by the Russians. But would President Bush have done better? The majority of the American and British people were definitely not prepared to embark anew on a major military campaign to liberate Eastern Europe when the war against Japan was so far from over. Would Bush have supported the communist leaders in the Kremlin with financial and military means, as Roosevelt did so extensively? Fascism might never have been defeated without FDR.

Sixty years after Yalta it’s tricky to walk with such big boots through history. At the end of the conference there was euphoria. Churchill was drunk with happiness, though the Russian champagne did its job. Observers spoke of great success and one of Roosevelt’s advisors, Harry Hopkins, concluded afterwards: ‘The Russians have given us so much at this conference. I don’t think we could have disregarded their wishes. We couldn’t let them down.’ Roosevelt himself said that he had done ‘what was possible, given the circumstances.’

A few weeks after Yalta Roosevelt died. The Yalta-agreements have stood the test of time. At Yalta tyranny and democracy came together. The ultimate lesson of Yalta is that the playing field of democratic ideals is limited by the harsh reality of every day life, not the other way around. President Bush might learn something from it as he tries to make history with the economic and political rebuilding of countries like Iraq.

October 1, 2005 the grandsons of the Big Three come together for of the opening of the ‘Graduate School of Governance’ in Maastricht. There, in the vicinity of the military cemetery Margraten, they will talk with politicians and students about the future of Europe, still not united sixty years after the war.

It will be a tribute to the Conference of Yalta when these discussions are held in a true sense of reality. And even more so if it’s held in a pleasant personal atmosphere. Is it fitting to drink a small glass of champagne sixty years later?

Back

Another Name for NATO

Miracles sometimes happen, such as when a local table wine from Europe turns into a superior vintage wine of world class. What to do if customers in our global supermarket suddenly realize that new ingredients become dominant in their product? Well, change the name and rules of engagement between the product’s participants.

Once we had NATO 1, from a US perspective created as the military consequence of President Truman’s political containment doctrine. With hindsight it is crystal clear that NATO’s narrow scope in its very first year was already undermined by the shocking events in China, in those days a staunch ally of the Soviet Union. One year later the Korean War began. My home country, the Netherlands, participated in that war under the auspices of the United Nations and not NATO.

NATO, because of treaty limitations, was from the start not allowed to adapt to a changing world, although it was to prove successful in the ‘European’ Cold War. In short, NATO was handicapped. The Korean and Vietnam Wars were no sideshows away from the main European theatre. The United States, in particular, paid a heavy price for this fundamental misunderstanding. The wars were all part of a global struggle against communism.

Nowadays NATO 2 is in a much better position to confront security problems on a world scale. In the early 1990s NATO was an alliance of sixteen countries that had never conducted a military operation and had no partner relationships. But on 11 August 2003 NATO took over the UN-mandated International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. NATO literally entered a new world. Now, in 2008, NATO has established partnerships with over 20 countries in Europe and Eurasia, seven in North Africa and the Middle East and four in the Persian Gulf. Global partners such as Australia and Japan are working with NATO in Afghanistan.

Almost every military, political and social problem has global implications. There is a real possibility that this age will become a ‘Pacific century’, featuring the rise of China as a great power in combination with a Russian resurgence. Almost everywhere, sleeping cells of terrorism, activated by radical civilians and paramilitary organizations, can suddenly become alive.

That means a metamorphosis for NATO in a world with different threats. NATO’s mandate, structure and personality need to change accordingly. It will lead to an increasingly stratified alliance.

If, because of internal political circumstances and/or different military skills and traditions, allies prefer nation-building in, for example, northern Afghanistan instead of counterinsurgency in the violent south, so be it. At least for the moment. In our times, first and foremost, we need a flexible NATO. There is nothing wrong with a two-tier NATO. The first priority is commitment, which can also be translated into a higher financial contribution.

We live in a transition period, coming from a world dominated by a ‘lonely superpower’. ‘9/11’ was proof to the world that even this ‘new Roman Empire’ had its power limits. It is more than a turnaround in perception. Washington definitely needs NATO.  To solve international security problems and to prevent future wars in a peaceful way, Ivo Daalder and James Goldgeier urged NATO in Foreign Affairs (September/October 2006)  to transform rapidly into ‘global NATO’. Why not expand NATO with staunch, reliable partners in Asia and South America?

For the moment Daalder’s and Goldgeier’s ideal is a bridge too far, but they are pointing in the right direction. For the near future, I cherish an essentially Euro-US alliance as a bedrock against the authoritarian Chinese and Russian actors on the global scene. Bound by the same democratic values, we can create a common and even better counterbalance against competitors and enemies. NATO’s enhanced power is not unlimited because it can not overrule the veto-power of the United Nations Security Council.

We have to change NATO’s ‘entrance hall’ and take the first measures to enlarge new NATO in a more responsible way. The ‘Membership Action Plans’ (MAP) are considered by aspiring non-NATO countries as virtual and quick guarantees of membership. We need more time to test their democratic and military qualifications. In the end we can present our allies, our partners, and indeed the rest of the world, with the best reasons why we want newcomers, to join our military-political alliance. And yes, Mr. Medvedev, including Ukraine and Georgia. Especially Kiev got already signals from NATO in 2006 that it is on the right track. Popular support in these countries is still relatively low. An extensive, professional information-campaign with reasonable targets must be adopted in MAP’s for aspiring countries. Support will rise as was the case with other new members like the Czech Republic and Slowakia.  

With self-confidence and facing new realities, we can in the meantime change the name of NATO. The Atlantic Ocean will become more and more an ordinary lake, just like the other seas. As a gesture to the world, and hopefully also as a lightning-rod, it is more fitting to opt for ‘Global Treaty Organization’. Let’s toast to a better world!

 Willem Post is a senior visiting fellow at ‘Clingendael’, the Netherlands Institute of International Relations in The Hague.

Back