Der Speigel notes that Bush is in an increasing minority when it come to the NATO presence in Afghanistan.

Sounds like that minority is continuing to ever decreasing.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/S…..4Df02.html

In public, NATO is demanding that all allies contribute their fair share to the ongoing effort in Afghanistan. But behind closed doors, a paper has been circulated that may provide the beginnings of an exit strategy. Germany is pushing the plan.

So far, little has remained behind closed doors at the NATO summit in Bucharest. Almost every cough from every negotiating session has found its way into the press. But there is one paper that has remained largely in the shadows. NATO diplomats have been working on a far-reaching strategy paper for the ongoing mission in Afghanistan.

The secrecy, some say, is necessary as the dossier contains details that could compromise the safety of NATO troops in Afghanistan. Others have been a bit more direct, saying that the paper is simply too controversial to be made public.

Controversial, in that they are still trying to get Bush to quit screaming and whining and moaning.

EW, you wrote:

After all, I can imagine the Canadians and French thinking, if the US had just heeded allies’ warnings about the Iraq War–or even simply abided by international law–the US would have plenty of troops to contribute to the Afghan cause. Why should NATO allies have to pay because the US has degraded its own military so badly?

Well, yes and no. A lot of ordinary Canadian citizens think that way. In fact, a majority of them seem to think that way, if you read any of the polls.

We have, however, a government that does not think that way, and for reasons I cannot explain to you — I really can’t — we’re in danger of seeing these guys re-elected to a majority, which will be disastrous for us in many ways. (Harper is a neo-lib, but he depends on a socially conservative base, to which he panders, and those people are seriously dangerous to our health in many ways.)

Stephen Harper is never going to be doing critical thinking of the kind you outline there. Harper is a Cheney wannabe; never imagine him thinking anything that Cheney wouldn’t think.

As Kerry ran for president, the Atocha terrorism of Madrid’s equivalent of NY’s GrandCentral occurred, mobilizing a lot of worried folks to vote Aznar out, and Zapatero in. In 2008 Zapatero won reelection on an agenda something like Turkey’s civilian model, but less reliant on support of the military, more on pocketbook factors and modernization of Iberian society. While the current reportage in Spain’s ElPais newsOrgan is about Putin’s relief that Nato will postpone incorporation of yet further newly independent states into Nato, the subtext in my reading, is the formulation of foreign policy which Zapatero is about to assemble, with his first term record of a drawdown of Spain involvement in Nato deployment of armies in the two warzones. This may be much less of impact than the economic powerhouse news in CAN, and from FR; but I think “Old Europe” still is stinging from some of the demiswank in Bush foreign initiatives, plus Bush is working from a dwindling base of support in the US. Some of the commenters above have offered much, but I thought the image of JCarlos chastizing the outspoken Chavez worth the link post here. BBC even thought the incident worth its own coverage. Both links for polyglots, but fairly easily graspable.