Bloodless Coup

Robert D. Kaplan, Obtuse and Misleading

Oy. What should we make of this column?

Borders may be eroding and stateless terrorist groups like al-Qaeda proliferating, but don't be fooled: The traditional state remains the most dangerous force on the international scene. Perhaps the greatest security threat we face today is from a paranoid and resentful state leader, armed with biological or nuclear weapons and willing to make strategic use of stateless terrorists.

Got that? If so - tell me what it is you got. "Traditional states remain the most dangerous force on the international scene" - fine, sure, ok. But PERHAPS what really matters most is WMD-armed individuals who want to act through stateless terrorists.

Duh-what? Those strike me as explicitly inconsistent statements. Am I missing something?

And of course much of the rest of the column is just plainly embarrassing. He doesn't like "pseudo-democratic legitimacy", by which he appears to mean that he doesn't like it when people he doesn't like get elected. But supposedly he doesn't like undemocratic systems that aren't responsive to the people will either. He writes derisively of systems where "the rulers can exploit the whole panoply of state power, without regard for the will of the people". And of course he sees states that don't like our economic policies as threats. Who knew?!?

Kaplan manages to make some decent points in all this - but on the whole this column's a Monet (fine when seen from a far, but when you look up close it's a big old mess). And as to why I keep borrowing terminology from Cher in Clueless - well, lately she just seems wiser than a lot of the pundits printed in the country's leading papers.