Opinion | Columnists
Bush's legacy of failure
Anywhere you look in the Middle East, the West (especially the US) has actively sought to establish permanent influence. But more often than not, it has done so at the expense of people's lives and well being.
- By Manal Alafrangi, Staff Writer
- Published: 00:02 September 11, 2007
- Image Credit: Illustration by Nino Jose Heredia/Gulf News
Anywhere you look in the Middle East, the West (especially the US) has actively sought to establish permanent influence. But more often than not, it has done so at the expense of people's lives and well being.
American policies have proved a complete failure on many fronts: in Palestine, the US has not shown any support for the establishment of a Palestinian state.
In Iran, US double-standards concerning the country's nuclear energy programme meant that the Islamic Republic was denied what other regional states were allowed to possess, and made war a possibility.
And it is safe to say that Bush's policies in Iraq have all been disastrous. Elsewhere, the disaster that is Guantanamo continues to haunt each and every one of us.
The US "war on terror" (that later became "war for freedom"), which was launched immediately following the tragic events of 9/11, resulted in the deaths of thousands of civilians and effectively failed in all is ostensible goals.
US president George W. Bush, who somehow linked his campaign against terror to Iraq, declared that his aim was to introduce democracy to Iraq.
But we can all see that Iraq has moved towards a radicalised version of democracy, where anyone opposed to the US-led occupation is gaining strength albeit not without controversy.
We find Bush today still refusing to set a date for the exit of US forces in Iraq despite global opposition building up against him. According to the latest survey conducted by BBC, ABC News and NHK in Iraq, most Iraqis think the US troop surge of the past six months has been a failure
Remember the days when the Bush administration argued that Middle Eastern authoritarianism was the ultimate cause of terrorism? Bush used to say that unless the US switched to a strategy of aggressive democracy promotion, the threat of terrorism would grow.
All this changed this year when Condoleezza Rice announced that the US was interested in assembling a coalition of "moderates" to block "extremists". In other words, the mission for spreading democracy was scrapped and now, attention was focussed on combating the "Iranian threat".
At the least, US policies following 9/11 have changed and shaped the American people's views as well as prejudices towards the Middle East. This alarming factor has long term effects.
By the same token, the overwhelming majority of Arabs are now highly sceptical of the US-led war against Iraq. If anything, this war is their prism through which they view international events. In other words, 6 years after 9/11, there is a heightened sense of paranoia across the globe.
The president himself is so paranoid he has commissioned domestic spying against his own civilians. People in the Middle East recognise the need to take effective measures against terrorism, yet any measures must be consistent with democratic values and the rule of law.
Military interventions cannot promote international security; they never have and never will. Just looking at Afghanistan and Iraq, it's clear that there have been gross violations of human rights and obviously no democracy.
Deteriorated
In Iraq, the US has literally tried to impose democracy at the barrel of a gun. As a result, the situation has deteriorated so badly that it gave rise to sectarian tensions and ultimately wars. Essentially, Iraq's various factions have united under a complex web of mutual interests and this has shown the Americans (and British) as being extremely weak.
It seems at this point, US policy in the region has undermined any democratic opening or even process and in fact, there has been an active American attempt at suppressing democratic change.
Look at Palestine, Lebanon and Iraq for recent examples. As of now, the only Middle Eastern country the US has not infiltrated is Iran but this could change very soon.
If one is to go by the recent rhetoric coming out of Washington, the US is willing to launch attacks on Iran's nuclear sites as early as next year. Vice-President Dick Cheney would certainly want to get the job done before the end of Bush's second term.
As simple as it is, perhaps the following should be further reinforced: if the US is interested in spreading democracy then it should know that democracy cannot take root when it is imposed from abroad according to set rules that are out of place in the targeted societies.
Currently, the US administration is doing what it can to devise some kind of a "winning" strategy in its biggest and most expensive "intrusion" post 9/11. But as James Baker once said, there are no longer good choices left when it comes to Iraq, only bad and less bad ones.
It is clear that the US today acts according to its interests in the Middle East- totally without any respect for international law.
Undoubtedly, Iraq has exposed the man who is unable to control his verbal gaffes as being misguided. While Bush commanded huge popularity post-9/11, his approval ratings have hit an all-time low.
Bush wants to cement a personal legacy and ensure Republican dominance of America's future but his only legacy will most likely be a nation more divided and more isolated than ever.
Most likely, he will go down in history as a cartoon figure who led the US into its big decline, wasting its money, international political capital and soldiers' lives. The Bush glory days of post 9/11 are well over.
Opinion Editor's choice
-
Russia, China complicit in Syria carnage
By Fawaz Turki, Special to Gulf News
By their double veto at the UN, they have chosen to back the Al Assad regime that is already wet spaghetti
-
Two prime ministers in trouble
By Kuldip Nayar, Special to Gulf News
Gilani faces contempt of court charge while Singh encounters moral responsibility in 2G scam case
-
Moving towards honest democracy
By Vladimir Putin, Prime Minister of Russia
Russia needs to unbundle power and property and separate executive power from system of checks over it
Your turn
