Middle-school diplomacy


In the midst of a report on yesterday’s big meeting between President Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin, and Mexican President Vicente Fox, The Washington Post caught a nice bit of maturity from our leadership:

Martin recently rejected Canadian participation in the U.S. missile defense system, and when he tried to explain, Bush did not return the call for more than a week.

Ah, because what we really need are more world leaders acting like petulant teenagers. Anyway, this whole flap over missile defense has never made much sense to me. After Bush’s re-election, the president asked Martin if he would give carte blanche support for the missile defense system now underway.

But Martin balked. No doubt it didn’t take the prime minister long to imagine the state of affairs ten years from now, when the missile defense shield isn’t just to thwart a few minor threats from Iran and North Korea, but rather as a continent-wide defense against China. Martin knows full well that the complete Pentagon vision involves linking up missile-defense to air and sea systems, as well as possible space and satellite systems, possibly with the aim of making China’s nuclear deterrent functionally useless. A carte blanche endorsement from Canada now would endorse this entire vision, and endorse the day when Canada can no longer conduct its own international affairs and high-tech weaponry is floating around throughout space.

So Martin’s position is understandable. But here’s the thing: Bush didn’t even need to ask for a blanket endorsement of the missile defense system. The thing is still in its infancy, it still hasn’t passed a single test, and even the Republican-controlled Congress hasn’t endorsed any further steps for the Pentagon’s broader defense vision. This would be like asking Martin to endorse a future army of super-intelligent cyborg warriors: there’s just no need right now. In the meantime, Bush could be discussing more important things with Canada, like border security or trade disputes or reconstruction in Afghanistan (Canada is playing a key role in the NATO force there).

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate

Share your feedback: We’re planning to launch a new version of the comments section. Help us test it.