The World & I Online Magazine, ONline Archive and Educational Resource  
World & I School | World & I Homeschool | World & I College | World & I Library
Username:   Password:      Subscribe Now   Register   About Us | Contact Us | FAQs      
The World & I Archive Peoples of the World Book Reviews Worldwide Folktales Fathers of Faith
Search  
Sort by: Results Listed:
Date Range:    Advanced Search

The World & I Magazine
 
Current Issue
The Arts
Life
Natural Science
Culture
Book World
Modern Thought
  Resources
American Waves
Book Reviews
Fathers of Faith
Footsteps of Lincoln
Millennial Moments
Peoples of the World
Profiles in Character
Traveling the Globe
Writers and Writing

What's at Stake


Article # : 10042 

Section : CURRENT ISSUES
Issue Date : 4 / 1986  1,820 Words
Author : Neil C. Livingstone
Neil C. Livingstone is an author, lecturer, and frequent media commentator. He runs a crisis-management firm in Washington, D.C., and has authored eight books on terrorism, including Inside the PLO (Morrow).

       The success enjoyed by the Reagan administration in providing for a smooth transition of power in the Philippines and Haiti is in stark contrast to the failures of the Carter administration in Iran and Nicaragua, where radical anti-American forces took over and are the source of continuing problems for the United States. Eager to deny Reagan all the credit, former Carter-era policymakers are already calling the Philippines a triumph of bipartisanship and pointing out the reasons that the situation there was so much less complex than the one faced by Carter in Iran. According to Carter's assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs, Richard Holbrooke, a viable democratic alternative existed to Marcos, whereas in Iran there was no choice between the strongman and the radicals. Holbrooke's contention certainly can be challenged, since the Iranian military, with appropriate U.S. encouragement and backing, could have played the same constructive role in bringing about a change in Iran as occurred in the Philippines, and do so before the radicals were at the gate.
       
        Holbrooke is more on target when describing television's role in increasing "the immediacy of the Philippines crisis in the United States and the sense that the United States had a stake in its outcome." Indeed, while the collapse of a friendly government in Iran, and its replacement with one that was openly hostile to American interests were a severe blow to U.S. foreign policy, it is nothing compared to the trauma that would flow from the "loss" of the Philippines. The U.S. stake in the Philippines is well-documented and goes back to the period when the Philippines was a U.S. commonwealth and the chief outpost of American power in the Pacific.
       
        Maintaining ... (1998 of 11191 Characters)
Read Full Article

Copyright © 2004 The World & I Online. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy