enquirer.com

News
Front Page
Local
Sports
-Bengals
-Reds
-Bearcats
-Xavier
Business
Weather
Traffic
Back Issues
AP Wire
-World
-Nation
-Sports
-Business
-Arts
-Health

Classifieds
Jobs
Autos
General
Obits
Homes

Freetime
Movies
Dining
Calendars
Weekend

Opinion
Columns
Borgman

GoCinci
HelpDesk
Feedback
Circulation
Subscribe
Phone #'s
Search

E N Q U I R E R   O P I N I O N
Sunday, April 18, 1999

Kosovo changes rules for 2000


It's no longer just economy, stupid

BY HOWARD WILKINSON
The Cincinnati Enquirer

        There is a word you used to hear in newsrooms that you don't hear much anymore. A phrase that made it plain that that Americans didn't pay much attention to what was happening outside their borders - even news people, who should have been paying attention.

        The word was “Afghanistanism.”

        Afghanistanism was newspaper shorthand for ponderous tomes by pointy-headed intellectuals about conflicts in ob scure countries whose names were as difficult to pronounce as to find on the map. They were relegated to the newspaper op-ed page, where they could be lost in the crowd.

        What it meant was “boring,” and, in the news business, boring is a bad thing. Very bad.

        But it's been quite some time since we have heard anyone use the term in a newsroom, and with good reason. Thanks to the former Soviet Union, we found out where Afghanistan is, and since then, we've become acquainted with some other once-mysterious parts of the globe as well.

        But we're still learning.

        Three weeks ago, when the president of the United States

        got around to addressing the American people about the crisis in Kosovo, he had to ask folks to pull the atlas off the bookshelf and find the tiny Balkan province. Those who own atlases, that is.

        Plus, the president had to explain that he himself had been doing a lot of studying up on the region recently.

        Since then, we've figured out where Kosovo is.

        So, too, have the politicians — particularly those who want to move into the White House when Bill Clinton is gone.

        There is a good chance that the United States could find itself involved in a protracted war — a real war, not the video game kind we've grown accustomed to.

        All of this takes place in the opening stages of the 2000 presidential election. It has the potential, at least, to run right through that election cycle.

        That means we seeing something that this country has not seen in a long time — a presidential campaign where the candidates are actually talking about America's foreign policy and military readiness, instead of the usual rants about too many taxes and arguments over who invented the Internet.

        In 1992 and again in 1996, neither Mr. Clinton nor his Republican opponents gave America's role in the world more than passing reference. The sign that hung on the wall of Clinton headquarters in Little Rock said it all: It's the economy, stupid.

        But this time around, presidential candidates are already debating the issue, although some most reluctantly.

        Pat Buchanan is on one end of the spectrum, taking the isolationist position that America has no business over there or anywhere else.

        Ohio's entry into the GOP presidential race, House Budget chairman John Kasich, is not far from Mr. Buchanan, although he bristles at being lumped in with him. He has staked out a position saying that there is no clear American interest in the Balkan conflict and opposes sending in ground troops. His suggestion is that NATO go back to mediation, that we find someone — the Russians, the Indonesians, even a Nelson Mandela — who can go in and cut a deal with the Serbs.

        And on the other end of the spectrum is Arizona Sen. John McCain, who is saying that, while the U.S. has generally made a dog's breakfast of the situation, we're in now and we ought to go in to win.

        George W. Bush, the presumed front-runner, for a while managed not to have a position, but now seems to be edging toward the McCain position.

        It is a debate Republicans really don't want to have, but, under the circumstances, they can't afford not to.

        A year from now, when both parties have chosen their candidates and the real campaign begins, the presidential contenders are going to have to talk in specific terms about why and how they would lead the country into war. Or how to get us out of the one we're in. This time around, there will be a new sign hanging on the wall: It's a big world, stupid.

        Howard Wilkinson's column runs Sundays. Call him at 768-8388 or e-mail at hwilkinson@enquirer.com.

       



Zoo hopes Miami manatees make a splash
Fabulous digs await new residents
Keepers ready manatees for Monday move
Parents' loving act honored
Volunteers swoop in, sweep up
Back to the trenches of mangled care
Pets package pays dividend
Interesting times ahead for Union
Children's Theatre season to open with 'The Crucible'
Fighting for independent films
'Catcher' contingent travels to L.A.
Filmmakers offer advice
GET TO IT
Time ticking away, 4th District race short a candidate
- Kosovo changes rules for 2000
Cops for Christ share burden
Forum to look at improving air quality
Kenton eager for weather sirens
Legislators say state will pay schools' tab
Merger talk riles departments
Pilot collapses, dies after setting plane onto road
Restoring early cemetery offers look at people of history
That slip of paper on car may be friendly tip, not ticket
Trail, fields to honor slain student
TRISTATE DIGEST
Wrestling artists - Why not?
The ceremony that links all of us together


 
Search | Questions/help | News tips | Letters to the editors
Web advertising | Place a classified | Subscribe | Circulation

Copyright 1995-2000. The Cincinnati Enquirer, a Gannett Co. Inc. newspaper.
Use of this site signifies agreement to terms of service updated 4/5/2000.