European Stars and Stripes (Newspaper) - April 29, 1991, Darmstadt, Hesse                                Monday. April 29, 1991 the stars and stripes Pago 13 commentary . Rosentha political democracy should t be frightening lets dream awhile. Just suppose the United states could come up with a concept for the Middle East that would give the people of the Region a Chance for happiness and end wars. That would certainly make a lot of friends for us protect us from getting ensnared militarily and lower our defense costs. It would obviously promote american National interests to do All that. And what would happen if the idea were presented the administration in Washington would run like hell. That is what it has been doing so far. A because the concept is no dream. It is at hand tested and proved workable in most other parts of the world. It is called political democracy. Democracy does not guarantee happiness. It just gives people the Chance to pursue it a an inspiration upon which America was created. But the spread of democracy does guarantee that the number of wars will go Down. No magic. It is simply that in a democracy the people must consider and support a War. Generally they to not approve unless they feel threatened. Democracies do not go to War with each other. Dictatorships need Only the decision of one Man to go to War. Dictators make that decision to expand their glory or treasuries or to Ward off rebellion at Home. The Bush administration like so Many of its predecessors certainly does believe in democracy a for designated parts of the world mostly where it is already in place. Such As North America selected countries in Central and South America Western and Central Europe Japan and maybe one or two other asian countries. For the soviet Union democracy is fairly acceptable to. Washington As Long As Mikhail Gorbachev is not damaged. But for China a done to be ridiculous. And for the Mideast and Africa a Why to promote the idea would be dangerous intervention. Intervention yes a but not the kind of armed intervention that diplomats and politicians now talk about to frighten us away from backing democracy or even rebels against tyranny. We cannot land troops in China or the Baltic to free the people from their tormentors. \ a a �?��?��?�.�?�. /. A a a. A but to promote democracy and to help the victims of dictatorship the United states could choose its friends and allies More carefully. It could Rule out alliances with terrorists seek out and support democratic groups William f. Buckley or. A pm do Birm Ifni hawgu73 whip Tow Mumm a Baman wherever it can find them openly through an enlarged National endowment for democracy. It would be moral intervention a and morality also now seems utterly terrifying. American diplomats never quarrel publicly with morality in personal life forfend. But so sadly often they flush in embarrassment at the idea of International morality like an atheist caught Reading the Bible. For Many years now the a a realists have dominated american foreign policy particularly on the Middle East. They constantly search for a a balance of Power that is unattainable because it is based on dictatorships which by their very nature Are the cause of instability. They dismiss the concept of morality in International affairs and believe that democracy is impossible in the Middle East. Yes it is impossible a As Long As the realists have their Way and we appease the Saddam Hussein and Hafez Al assays of the area coddle the Oil despots and Are in a constant twitch of irritation about our support of Israel the Only democracy in the area. Just see where realpolitik has gotten us in the Mideast Iran in the hands of religious fanatics Syria and Libya ruled under terrorist fascism Saddam Hussein still in Power marauding and a million iraqi refugees clawing for food crying out their hunger and betrayal. A a a. A a a a a a a. A a a a. A. A a a a a. A a a a a a a a a for a Brilliant analysis of the Power of democracy and the Folly of realism read a exporting democracy a by Joshua Muravchik just published by the american Enterprise Institute press. It will be lastingly important. Dictators claim the right to kill without interference. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn wrote these sentences a i Tell you interfere More Ana More. We beg you to come and  that is the prayer of All living political prisoners and refugees. It is the prayer that rises from the Graves of those who were shot butchered strangled or incinerated quietly without interference. A the new York Timos. A introductions Are not what they used to be David Margolick of the new York times writes inquisitively and with amusement on the matter of honorific. Specifically he Narrows his concern to judges and justices past and present. A Little while ago a nervous lawyer from Florida was Halfway through a pleading presumably if from Florida trying to get a stay of a capital sentence before the supreme court. When addressing or. Rehnquist he referred to him As  explosion in the court a Al am the chief Justice a or Rehnquist barked. Of of. But then what about Justice who has retired or a judge a for research purposes a or. Margolick writes a a reporter recently called three former Federal judges now working for Law firms in the new York area Marvin Frankel Frederick b. Lacey and Harold r. Tyler or. Sure enough their telephones were answered a judge Frankel a office a a judge Lacey a office and a judge Tyler a office a  William Hughes Mulligan was once a judge but pulled out so that he could make enough Money to buy his boys a bicycle and was asked How he should be addressed. He is a gentleman of Nice perspectives and solemnly suggested a a a your worship will do a commenting later that his suggestion was not taken seriously. And making the further comment that titles adhered to after a term of office flirt with the constitutional ban against granting titles of nobility. 1 have wondered about the Point having observed that some former ambassadors cling to a ambassador Jones is calling a As. Do some governors and some senators whereas others a done to. Professor John k. Galbraith with his Fine sense of instrumentality advises me that his Rule is to use a a ambassador a he was ambassador to India under Juk a Only when he is trying to get to the head of the line. Like pull which he once warned should not of used except when useful. It happens that i dined a few times with Herbert Hoover in new York once alone with my wife. I Hadnot been instructed in protocol and referred to him simply As a emr.  his intimates always called him  but i heard others also Call him a emr.  when did it begin that once a president always a president l put the question to the biographer of or. Hoover the distinguished historian or. George Nash. He nonplussed me by telling me that he was himself nonplussed. So much so that he went to the archives and dug up the first 100 communications sent to Hoover after he left the White House. One third of these were addressed a dear or. President a one third a dear or. Hoover a one third a dear  perhaps a historian chancing on these words who has studied Post presidential etiquette will advise me of the practice Over american history. We All know that when Thomas Geffen son left the White House he became once again or. Jefferson. Lie would probably have shot anyone who called him or president. When did it begin with Harry Truman he was very self consciously a former president and i therefore think it Likely. But descending on the matter of Hon orifice to the most common species one begins to wonder what is happening to  a few months ago i was being driven by a most amiable College Junior and three of her confederates to a major University they had met me at the. Airport where i would lecture. As we approached the restaurant where we would Dine before the affair she turned to me in the car and asked a How shall i introduce you to the dinner guests As a Bill a i did my Best to achieve pomposity. Quoth me a i am 65 years Loci. I am not in town to run for the student Council. You May introduce me As a or.  a it was dark in the car. But i could see the incredulity in her eyes. Well she was preparing to sponsor a conservative lecturer and was getting total immersion before dinner. It is curious because i note a kind of hierarchical polarization going on. When i w As at College and editor of the daily newspaper it would have been unprecedented to refer to the president of the University other than As a emr.  today the president is a president  Back then a professor was a emr. Whitehead a which is also what head have been called by his students. Today he would be a Cdr. Whitehead a and his students would Call him Chuck. And it is so to the extent that my inexact soundings Are reliable elsewhere the personalized second person a Stu a both in French and in Spanish was for whole glacial periods reserved for spouses children servants and pets. Others were a Avo us or  no More. Short perhaps of addressing the King of Spain or the president of France if you done to slip into a a tue within five minutes that suggests you Are condescending to him. All of which intensifies the Subtle distinction made by Evelyn Waugh. He wrote a i believe in intimacy. I do not like informality.�?�. Universal press Syndicate the opinions expressed in the columns and cartoons on this Page represent those of the authors and Are in no Way to be considered As representing the views of the stars and stripes or the United states government