HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031883.jpg
2.11 MB
Extraction Summary
3
People
4
Organizations
5
Locations
3
Events
2
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
News article / clipping
File Size:
2.11 MB
Summary
A Financial Times article by Gideon Rachman dated June 13, 2011, analyzing a speech by US Defence Secretary Robert Gates. Gates criticized NATO allies for their lack of participation in the Libya intervention and their reliance on US military spending. The article argues that this reluctance signals the end of 'liberal interventionism' and explains why the West is unlikely to intervene in Syria despite atrocities committed by the Syrian army. The document appears to be a clipping included in House Oversight materials.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Gideon Rachman | Author |
Author of the Financial Times article.
|
| Robert Gates | US Defence Secretary |
Subject of the article; gave a speech in Brussels criticizing NATO allies regarding Libya and military spending.
|
| Colonel Gaddafi | Leader of Libya |
Mentioned in the context of NATO bombing his forces.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Financial Times |
Publisher of the article.
|
|
| Nato |
North Atlantic Treaty Organization; criticized by Gates for lack of participation and spending.
|
|
| Syrian Army |
Mentioned as brutalizing and killing citizens.
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Implied by the footer stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT'.
|
Timeline (3 events)
Locations (5)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Subject of the headline and analysis regarding non-intervention.
|
|
|
Location where Robert Gates gave his speech.
|
|
|
Location of NATO intervention and fighting.
|
|
|
Mentioned regarding military spending and leadership.
|
|
|
Mentioned regarding allies and NATO participation.
|
Relationships (2)
Gates criticized NATO allies for not participating in fighting and relying on US spending.
US exasperated by European allies running out of munitions.
Key Quotes (5)
"dismissed most of America’s European allies as a useless bunch of timewasters."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031883.jpg
Quote #1
"forcing an exasperated America to step into the breach."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031883.jpg
Quote #2
"US accounts for 75 per cent of the military spending in Nato was “unacceptable” and unsustainable."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031883.jpg
Quote #3
"Nato faces a “dismal” future."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031883.jpg
Quote #4
"Why Syria will get away with it"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031883.jpg
Quote #5
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,638 characters)
8
Article 3.
The Financial Times
Why Syria will get away with it
Gideon Rachman
The Financial Times
Why Syria will get away with it
Gideon Rachman
June 13 2011 -- late last week, Robert Gates, the US defence secretary, launched an offensive of his own. In a speech in Brussels, he dismissed most of America’s European allies as a useless bunch of timewasters. I paraphrase – but not much.
Mr Gates pointed out that while all Nato countries had voted to intervene in Libya, most had chosen not to participate in the actual fighting. Even those European countries that are taking part began to run short of munitions just 11 weeks into the fighting – forcing an exasperated America to step into the breach. More broadly, a situation in which the US accounts for 75 per cent of the military spending in Nato was “unacceptable” and unsustainable. If it is not rectified, Mr Gates predicted, Nato faces a “dismal” future.
The conjunction of the Gates speech and the Syrian civil war is very telling. It explains why a 20-year experiment with the idea that western military force can put the world to rights is coming to a close.
Just a few weeks ago, that would have seemed a surprising conclusion. Supporters of “liberal interventionism” hailed the decision to bomb Colonel Gaddafi’s forces in Libya as evidence of a longed-for new era, in which dictators can no longer feel free to massacre their own people.
However a western failure to intervene, as the Syrian army brutalises and kills its own citizens, is likely to be a more accurate guide to the future than the Libyan campaign. There is, of course, a direct link between the west’s reluctance to get involved in Syria and the
Mr Gates pointed out that while all Nato countries had voted to intervene in Libya, most had chosen not to participate in the actual fighting. Even those European countries that are taking part began to run short of munitions just 11 weeks into the fighting – forcing an exasperated America to step into the breach. More broadly, a situation in which the US accounts for 75 per cent of the military spending in Nato was “unacceptable” and unsustainable. If it is not rectified, Mr Gates predicted, Nato faces a “dismal” future.
The conjunction of the Gates speech and the Syrian civil war is very telling. It explains why a 20-year experiment with the idea that western military force can put the world to rights is coming to a close.
Just a few weeks ago, that would have seemed a surprising conclusion. Supporters of “liberal interventionism” hailed the decision to bomb Colonel Gaddafi’s forces in Libya as evidence of a longed-for new era, in which dictators can no longer feel free to massacre their own people.
However a western failure to intervene, as the Syrian army brutalises and kills its own citizens, is likely to be a more accurate guide to the future than the Libyan campaign. There is, of course, a direct link between the west’s reluctance to get involved in Syria and the
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031883
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document