defense ministers gathered in Vienna tornexamine the potential evolution of thernWestern European Union (WEU) intornthe full-fledged militar)’ arm of the EuropeanrnUnion (E.U.), a possibilit- whichrnwould effectively replace NATO in Europernand exclude the United States fromrnthe Old Continent.rnThe idea is not new, especially not inrnParis and Bonn. Until recently, however,rnBritain has resisted it —most notablyrnat the Euro-summit in Amsterdam inrn1997. But whereas British Prime MinisterrnTony Blair staved off a Franco-Germanrncall for a stronger military role forrnthe WEU on that and other occasions,rnin Vienna he announced that Britainrnwould “consider various means by whichrnEurope could respond swiftly and responsively”rnto certain challenges, even ifrnAmerica is reluctant to commit itselfrnHis statement signaled a radical shift inrnBritish policy, which had seemed to bernfirmly founded on Britain’s “special”rntrans-Ariantic relationship with flie UnitedrnStates. Previously, Blair had even proposedrnthe abolition of the WEU, favoringrninstead a defense link between thernEuropean Union and NATO that wouldrninclude America.rnThe change of strategy in London isrnthe direct result of the Iraqi crisis, whichrnhad reached its climax a week before thernmeeting in Vienna. The managementrnof that crisis bv the Clinton administrationrncontributed to Britain’s growing displeasurernwith the U.S. leadership, whichrnis now seen in London as erratic, unpredictable,rnand dangerous. As the disputernover arms inspections escalated, Britainrnwas the only E.U. country to pledge itsrnmilitarv forces for attacks against Iraq.rnOther European nations remained aloofrnor displaved outright hostility toward thernheavy-handed attempt by Clinton, Albright,rnand Cohen to impose their unilateralrninterpretation of what constitutesrnIraqi compliance with U.N. resolutions.rnBut when the hawks in Washington lostrntheir nerve and proclaimed a non-existentrndiplomatic victory, London endedrnup with egg all over its face. Blair’s cautiousrnsupport of a European securit}’ apparatusrnindependent of NATO reflectsrnthe desire of the British government notrnto be left out on a limb again.rnIn the meantime, Europe’s most powerfulrncountr)’ has expressed its desire forrnEurope to be able to act independentlyrnof Washington. Germany’s defense minister,rnRudolf Scharping, called on Europeansrnto “overcome our weaknessesrninstead of complaining about thernU.S. leadership.” Chancellor GerhardrnSchroder is a strong proponent of thernWEU defense structure. His juniorrncoalition partner. Green leader JoschkarnFischer, declared his opposition to NATO’srncurrent nuclear deterrence strateg)’,rnwhich still allows for first use. In addition,rnthe Germans want to reducernEuropean purchases of American-madernweapons systems by promoting intra-rnEuropean joint ventures that would reducerncosts and increase competiti’enessrnabroad.rnLast, but by no means least, Germany’srndesire to diminish the importancernof NATO is seen in Bonn asrna means of improving relations withrnthe Russians, who are understandablyrnalarmed at the proposed expansion ofrnNATO. The former Warsaw Pact countriesrnthat are seeking military securityrnthrough membership in NATO alsorndesire membership in the EuropeanrnUnion. One wav of simultaneously reducingrnU.S. influence and decreasingrntension with Russia would be to offerrnthose countries an alternative, purely Europeanrndefense structure, which wouldrnnot be viewed by Moscow as a threat ofrnthe same magnitude. Advocates of thernWEU-based defense mechanism see it asrnthe best of all worlds: a regional securityrnapparatus capable of projecting influencerneastward —thereby reducing Europe’srnreliance on the unpredictablernUnited States—and of making NATO’srnrole in today’s Europe superfluous.rnIn light of such developments, somernEuropean analysts are beginning to suspectrnthat the Clinton administration isrnpersevering in its interventionist policyrnin the Balkans in order to secure for itselfrnan exclusive zone of political dominancernand military presence in Europe in easernU.S. troops have to leave Germany. ArernBosnia, Macedonia, Albania, and —inrnthe near future—Albanian-controlledrn”Kosova” all slated to become UnclernSam’s post-NATO bridgehead? The notionrnis not as far-fetched as it may havernseemed only a year ago.rnThose who shape America’s foreignrnpolicv suffer from what British atomicrnscientist P.S.M. Blackett called thern”Jupiter complex”—the belief that “thernAllies” (a.k.a. “the International Community”)rnare righteous gods, raining retributionrnon their wicked enemies. Itrnwas only a matter of time before thisrnbrand of statesmanship—bomb Sudanrnand Afghanistan one da}’, the Serbs andrnthe Iraqis the next, and woe to those whorndon’t toe the line!—produced the kindrnof backlash we are witnessing in Europerntoday.rn— SrdjaTrifkovicrnJ A C K KEVORKIAN may have decidedrnto assist in one last suicide: his own. InrnNovember, Kevorkian provided 60 Minutesrnwith a videotape of the death ofrnThomas Youk, a 52-year-old man withrnLou Gehrig’s disease. Kevorkian bluntlyrnadmitted that he had turned the tapernover in order to force prosecutors in OaklandrnCounty, Michigan, to charge himrnin Youk’s death, telling 60 Minutes: “Eitherrn[the prosecutors] go or I g o . . . . If I’mrnacquitted, they go, because they knowrnthey’ll never convict me. If I’m convicted,rnI will starve to death in prison, so Irnwill go. . . . The issue’s got to be raised tornthe level where it is finally decided.” JMthoughrnKevorkian was clearly manipulatingrnCBS for his own purposes, 60rnMinutes aired selected footage anyway.rnThe tape revealed a horrifying spectaclernthat cannot be called an “assistedrnsuicide” by any stretch of the Englishrnlanguage. Kevorkian claims to have providedrnprevious “patients” with lethal dosesrnof medication or the use of his “suicidernmachine” —a ghastly contraptionrnwhich releases deadly chemicals into thernperson’s bloodstream after he or shernpresses a button—but he made no suchrnpretense this time. Even though Youkrncould have swallowed pills or used thernsuicide machine, his participation in hisrnown death was limited to signing a “consentrnform.” Dr. Death took over fromrnthere, injecting a muscle relaxant intornYouk’s arm, followed by a lethal dose ofrnpotassium chloride. As viewers watched,rnYouk’s body stiffened and then collapsed.rnAlmost as horrifying as Kevorkian’srncold-blooded murder of Youk was therndecision by 60 Minutes to run what canrnonly be called a “snuff tape.” Kevorkianrnclearlv took great pleasure in the broadcast,rnand even Mike Wallace had to admitrnthat there was something “ghoulish”rnabout Kevorkian’s desire to “share” thisrnwith the rest of America. Wallace, however,rndidn’t seem to find anything ghoulishrnabout CBS’s decision to air the tape,rnand in the wake of the episode, he evenrnassured opponents of assisted suicide thatrn60 Minutes had nothing but the best ofrnjournalistic intentions. It was merely arncoincidence that the segment aired onrn6/CHRONICLESrnrnrn