Regards, Ivan
Posted on 01/29/2003 5:33:10 PM PST by MadIvan
President George W Bush devoted just 18 words in his hour long State of the Union address to a question that many consider to be at the heart of the current world instability.
And those words could not have been more bland. He said: "In the Middle East, we will continue to seek peace between a secure Israel and a democratic Palestine."
By speaking so little, Mr Bush said a lot. Not long ago the conventional view was that with Iraq out of the way, Bush junior, like his father before him, would turn his attention to Israel-Palestine.
That does not appear to be the case. There are growing signs that once the dust has settled on Baghdad the Bush team has a grander plan in mind. Instead of concentrating on one notoriously barren corner of the Middle East, the administration seems tempted to try to establish peace and stability in the region as a whole.
Last year the president sketched the outlines of a Bush doctrine in a statement on national security. He said he intended to "extend" peace by encouraging free and open societies on every continent.
He has a great opportunity to do so in the Middle East in the surge of potentially creative chaos that a Gulf war will churn up. There are hints in the address that he is willing to take it.
Talking directly to the Iraqi people he promised them "food, medicine, supplies and freedom". He declared that the day Saddam went "will be the day of your liberation". America, even if it wants to, will be unable to walk away from Iraq when the war is over and its presence will ensure that democracy is given a try. If it works it could become contagious.
Mr Bush took special trouble to encourage the pro-democracy movement in neighbouring Iran, another big, oppressed nation, most of whose citizens want to end their international isolation. Saddam is a symbol of the rusted thinking that for half a century has immobilised Middle Eastern politics. "We need to get rid of slogans," said Mohammed Al-Jassem, editor-in-chief of Al-Watan newspaper in Kuwait.
"We have spent the last 50 years shouting about Israel and shouting against imperialism. I hope that with Saddam Hussein gone there will be a new, realistic way of thinking. We live in a dream world."
A war in Iraq has the potential to change the region, irrevocably and for the better.
Support for Saddam, as manifested in Palestinian refugee camps, is a measure of despair. For most people living in the Middle East, his removal offers a flicker of hope that their selfish, tyrannical rulers might be replaced, or at least forced to mend their ways. Arab governments have also said little during the crisis. Privately they express fears that a war will unleash a wave of popular anger against America. A bigger concern is that the rage will be directed against themselves.
Saudi Arabia, America's biggest Arab friend and ally, has given no official response to the Blix report and its implicit message of impending war. State-controlled newspapers have been less reticent.
"In the name of fighting terrorism, the world's superpower is re-introducing colonialism, mandates and trusteeships to international politics, just as was the case after the First World War," one commentator railed.
The princes, it seems, are worried that war in Iraq means that the winds of change could soon be blowing their way.
Regards, Ivan
The world will be a much better place.
"Taking down Iraq is not sticking the camel's nose into the tent. It's leaving a camel's head in the bed of every Arab leader."
Just think of the fun we can have.
Powell telling a wavering ally: "Do it for the Dubyafather."
Bush talking to Masoud Barzani (the Kurdish leader): "Mr. Barzani, I do this small favor for you today. Someday--and that day may never come, Inshallah--I may ask a small favor in return."
Bush briefing Rumsfeld before he visits Schroeder and Chirac: "Leave the gun, remember to take the cannelloni."
A very significant development, if true. Of course GWB has only 6 years to accomplish something there, not a long time.
Unless his successor has the same vision. Someone like Condi Rice. ;)
Regards, Ivan
That's a line I'm gonna remember for a long time. Classic.
Doesn't seem like a very fertile region for nation building to me.
I'd think I'd prefer vaporizing them with nukes, then bring our military right back home.
Indeed. One might remember that Kennan's basic "containment" policy structure held across multiple administrations both Democratic and Republican. What the Arabs are rightly worried about is that this does not represent a policy direction of the Bush administration, or the Republicans, not even of the entirety of U.S. government, but given Blair's support and that of your country (personally I think Great Britain's stand is an example of highest honor in this, and I'm not exaggerating), a policy direction that may be that of the entire Western world. It is very much, in that sense, a "clash of civilizations."
This didn't have to be, or if Huntington was right, at least didn't have to be yet. Cheap oil and minimal blood were powerful arguments in favor of the status quo and the Saudis have been artists at maintaining both. It is appropriate, IMHO, that it was one of their own who started the thing rolling before it could possibly be an even fight. Will Osama bin Laden be remembered as Gavrilo Princip is?
Bush Doctrine Unfolds :
| To find all articles tagged or indexed using Bush Doctrine Unfold , click below: | ||||
| click here >>> | Bush Doctrine Unfold | <<< click here | ||
| (To view all FR Bump Lists, click here) | ||||
Bush is on a roll!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.