« 22-Nation Poll: China Seen More Favorably Than US, Russia | Main | Bolton's nomination greeted with skepticism in Germany »

March 08, 2005

An assessment for Bush's policy in Middle-east

By Pierre Langlais

As an introduction to George W. Bush's speech on Middle east situation and war against terrorism, the French daily Le Monde published on Tuesday March 8th a long article about the reaction of the media, the politics and the Americans on Bush's policiy.
For Corine Lesnes, the Bush's administration avoid avery kind of triumphalism regarding the changes happening in middle east and eastern Europe. She quotes Condoleezza Rice:

"there is no need for triumphalism, because if there's a triumph here it's not America's triumph; it's the triumph of the human spirit; it's the triumph of human will to live in freedom."

the Secretary of State said on Friday March on PBS. Lesnes insists however on the fact that Ms Rice added, "when the American president says things, it matters".

Then she makes a quick review of the US press. Only one word comes to her mind : "historic". She quotes the editorial of the New York Times(march 1rst) :

"The Bush administration is entitled to claim a healthy share of the credit for many of these advances. It boldly proclaimed the cause of Middle East democracy at a time when few in the West thought it had any realistic chance."

She also quotes Fareed Zakaria in Newsweek, who wrote that Bush's vision of a new mideast was "fondamentaly right", "maybe because of his relative ignorance of the area".

The "Neocons" are in the best position to show their support to the president. William Kristol, one of the thinkers of the movement, estimates that January 30th - the Iraqi's elections - will probably remain one of the key-dates for a validation of Bush's policy as the best response to 9/11. Kristol wrote in the Weekly Standard

"If Bush manages to succeed in Iraq, to force Syria to withdraw from Lebanon and to weaken Iranian mollahs, then the historians will say: Bush was ready to fight and he was right."

Even the Democrats seems to join the congratulations for president Bush, says Corine Lesnes. She quotes Senator Ted Kennedy, who said that the changes in mideast are "extremely constructive", stressing the importance of the president's role and his "reflexion" on the democratization of the Arab world. She also quotes diplomat Nancy Soderberg, who worked with Bill Clinton, saying last week in New York that "if Bush succeds [in the area] it is over for the Democracts for the twenty next years".
However, some Democrats keep attacking George W. Bush, like Congressman Charles Rangel, who said that

"What we [The USA] want is to catch terrorists, not Americans to die just for elections."

Lesnes also gives the point of view of experts, especially Juan Cole, Professor of History at the University of Michigan :

"Much of the authoritarianism in the Middle East since 1945 had actually been supported (sometimes imposed) by Washington for Cold War purposes. The good thing about the democratization rhetoric coming out of Washington (which apparently does not apply to Algeria, Tunisia, Jordan, Yemen, Uzbekistan, and other allies against al-Qaeda) is that it encourages the people to believe they have an ally if they take to the streets to end the legacy of authoritarianism. But Washington will be sorely tested if Islamist crowds gather in Tunis to demand the ouster of bin Ali. We'll see then how serious the rhetoric about people-power really is" he wrote for his blog, antiwar.com.

She finally insist on the Americans opinion, quoting a CBS-NYTimes poll which reveled that Bush priorities are out of step with Americans. Indeed, 59% of them care more about the economic situation and the local matters than about the international situation.

Posted March 8, 2005 01:53 PM

Comments

Post a comment