New York Times
Washington's plans for fighting terrorism with military aid and training programs continue to expand, now to a troubled border region of the former Soviet republic of Georgia, next door to Russia's war in Chechnya. It's a treacherous place for American military advisers to go, not only because of Georgia's chronic turbulence but also because of Russian sensitivities regarding this region. Washington should proceed with a limited mission, making clear that its only purpose is to help Georgia hunt down terrorists, not to compete with Moscow for military influence in the Caucasus.
The area America is particularly concerned about is called the Pankisi Gorge. For years, this lawless region has been used as a sanctuary by Chechen rebels and the relatively small number of Arab and Afghan fighters aiding their cause. There is a slight chance that leaders of al Qaida who managed to escape Afghanistan may be sheltered there. ...
Hunting down international terrorists in the Pankisi Gorge would be an appropriate issue for the new cooperation council NATO now proposes to establish with Moscow. Last week, NATO suggested holding monthly meetings between the 19 alliance members and Russia to talk about issues of common concern, including the fight against terrorism. Using these meetings to discuss strengthened military action against international terrorists taking shelter in the Caucasus would help assure that this new council does not degenerate into an empty diplomatic ritual.
Washington Post
One of the Bush administration's greatest achievements last year was progress on the trade agenda. Abroad, the president's energetic trade czar resolved a long-standing spat with Europe and helped launch a global round of trade talks. At home, the House passed a trade promotion authority bill that would give the administration the clout to negotiate more trade deals. Now, however, that momentum is in danger of fizzling.
The most immediate threat to trade liberalization is the steel lobby. President Bush has until Wednesday to decide on tariff protection following a determination by a special tribunal that imports are hurting the steel industry. Actually, imports have been falling since their peak following the Asian financial crisis, steel-company share prices have outperformed the world stock market index since October and steel prices are rising. But even if there were a strong case for protection, announcing new steel tariffs is liable to infuriate trading partners. The European Union might hit back by pressing its complaint against an American tax rule that the World Trade Organization has pronounced unfair. Developing countries might question the sincerity of the Bush administration's tariff-cutting rhetoric. Rather than pressing ahead with freer trade, the world's leaders might waste time trading insults. ...
A year ago the prospects for trade seemed similarly uncertain. Just as it did last year, the administration can recover the initiative on trade. But in weighing this week's steel decision, it should do the minimum damage possible to the broader trade agenda. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill recently testified that cutting global trade barriers by one-third would be "equivalent to a tax cut of $2,500 per year for the typical American family." The prize awaits; the challenge is to stay focused on winning it.
Washington Times
The connection between narco-trafficking and terrorism is coming into sharper focus in wake of September 11 and quickly becoming a national-security priority. To a large degree, the Bush administration is giving that connection its due attention, but according to congressional sources, it is on the verge of making a serious misstep. Instead of supporting former Colombian police chief Jose Serrano -- who trounced the most vicious drug cartels in the world and has a stellar human-rights record -- as executive director of the U.N. Office for Drug Control and Crime Prevention, the State Department is backing a lackluster Italian nominee.
The State Department has its reasons for backing Italy's choice. The Italians, like the Americans, have been a top contributor to the U.N. drug program and would like to see their financial backing translate into greater influence there. The United States has made similar arguments in the past -- drawing criticism from the Europeans -- and is understandably sympathetic to this position. Also, the State Department is keen to stay in the good graces of European allies, since their support of America's counter-terrorist policies has become increasingly tenuous.
But Italy's candidate, Giuseppe Lumina, has no counternarcotics experience and the last U.N. drug czar, Italian Pino Arlacchi, was widely accused of fraud and mismanagement. Also, the State Department should keep close in mind that the next czar will be given a lead role in creating an anti-narcotics police force in Afghanistan. This task is critical, since the opium and heroin trade in that country was a key source of revenue for the Taliban and al Qaida. ...
Washington has longed recognized Mr. Serrano's remarkable achievements. In July 2000, he became the first non-DEA agent to be honored with the DEA's special-agent award. While he was head of police, the International Association of Chiefs of Police named Mr. Serrano the "Best Policeman in the World." Former DEA chiefs Thomas A. Constantine and Donnie R. Marshall have written letters backing Mr. Serrano for the U.N. post, as have House Speaker Dennis Hastert and several other members of Congress, including Dan Burton, Benjamin Gilman, Asa Hutchinson, Henry Hyde, Cass Ballenger, Bob Barr, Jesse Helms, Mark Souder. They support Mr. Serrano because he is the best candidate for the U.N. drug-czar post. If the administration fails to do so, it will be difficult to imagine why.
Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel
When President Bush went to China recently for a two-day visit, he hoped to conclude an agreement that would end, or at least reduce, China's ballistic missile sales to countries such as Pakistan and Iran. The issue has bedeviled U.S.-Chinese relations for a long time, and at least part of the reason it's unresolved is that the two sides have been playing a diplomatic version of Alphonse and Gaston for more than a year.
In November 2000, China agreed to issue rules and regulations governing the export of missile parts and the sale of technical expertise. To clear up any ambiguities about what could or could not be sold and to help the government rein in its free-wheeling and increasingly independent arms companies, China also promised to publish a list of sensitive "dual-use" items that could not be exported. ...
The good news is that the impasse may end soon. A top Chinese arms negotiator, Liu Jieyi, will visit Washington later this month in preparation for a visit in April by the putative successor to Chinese President Jiang Zemin. The most obvious way to end the stalemate is with an agreed-upon timetable for specific action by each country. If neither China nor the U.S. wants to make the first move, then the pair can and should agree to move simultaneously. One thing is sure: This stately but pointless diplomatic minuet needs to end.
New York Newsday
The war in Afghanistan is not over yet, and the troubles of Kabul's new government are just beginning. Even as U.S. and Afghan forces engage in a major offensive against the regrouped remnants of Taliban and al-Qaida fighters, the military campaign may prove less daunting than the challenge of rebuilding a government in Afghanistan. Unless the Bush administration moves to quell rivalries among tribal warlords, Afghanistan could descend into a chaos that would doom its new government. The actions taken so far are not enough.
When the Afghan campaign seemed all but won in December, administration officials pledged that Afghanistan would not be allowed to fall into the intertribal entropy that followed the Soviet occupation more than a decade ago. The world, Afghans were told, would stay involved even after the war was won.
At first, it seemed to work. An interim government was formed quickly, headed by a credible leader, Hamid Karzai. An international aid conference generated $4.5 billion in pledges from many nations. The United Nations authorized an international peacekeeping force.
But then reality and inertia crept in. The peacekeeping force is 4,000 troops and is confined to Kabul. The aid - not a penny of which has reached Afghanistan - needs a channel for distribution and a plan for reconstruction. ...
Solutions? Send in at least 50,000 international peacekeepers to quell tribal fighting; fulfill last week's demand by the UN special envoy to Afghanistan for an immediate $1.2 billion in emergency aid; start training an army for the central government. All that takes leadership to put in motion. President George W. Bush must provide it. He owes it to the nation he helped free from tyranny.
(Compiled by United Press International)
