[Mb-civic] The Rhetoric of Bush's Inaugural Address versus the Reality of Bush Policy

[ean at sbcglobal.net]

Published on Friday, January 21, 2005 by CommonDreams.org  
The Rhetoric of Bush's Inaugural Address versus 
the Reality of Bush Policy  
by Stephen Zunes  
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0121-22.htm
  
President Bush’s second inaugural address has received 
widespread praise for its recognition of the imperative of advancing 
human freedom worldwide, not just for its own sake, but for 
America’s own national interest. 

Unfortunately, this ignores the fact that the United States has long 
been the number one military, diplomatic, and economic backer of 
the world’s most repressive regimes, a pattern that has only been 
strengthened under the Bush administration. 

Correctly recognizing the roots of terrorism, President Bush noted 
that “as long as whole regions of the world simmer in resentment 
and tyranny prone to ideologies that feed hatred and excuse murder 
violence will gather, and multiply in destructive power, and cross the 
most defended borders, and raise a mortal threat.” For much of the 
second half of his first term, he has emphasized that as a necessary 
means of curbing the threat of terrorism the United States much 
push for reform and democratization of the autocratic governments 
of Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, and the Palestine Authority. 

It is important to note, however, that none of the 9/11 hijackers 
came from those countries. Instead, they came from U.S.-backed 
dictatorships like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab 
Emirates, which continue to receive billions of dollars worth of U.S. 
military equipment annually. Oman, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, 
Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Azerbaijan, Tunisia and Morocco are also 
among the autocratic regimes in the Islamic world which continue to 
receive unconditional support from the United States. 

A look at the six family dictatorships of the Persian Gulf region 
propped up by American arms and advisors underscores the irony 
that the nation founded in one of the first republican revolutions 
against monarchial rule is now the primary supporter of the world’s 
few remaining absolute monarchies. 

It is presumably no coincidence that the only autocratic regimes 
toward which the Bush administration has pressed for reform have 
been those which have traditionally opposed American hegemonic 
goals in the region. 

In addition, while Israel serves as an exemplary democracy for its 
Jewish citizens, the right-wing government of Ariel Sharon has 
engaged in a pattern of gross and systematic human rights 
violations in its occupied Palestinian territories, practices made 
possible in large part through billions of dollars worth of 
unconditional military and economic assistance sent annually 
courtesy of the American taxpayer. 

If U.S. policy is indeed so contrary to the promotion of freedom and 
liberty, why has this become such a focal point of the Bush 
administration at the start of its second term? 

Perhaps it is a means of diverting attention from the administration’s 
disastrous policies in Iraq. Though claims that Saddam Hussein still 
possessed “weapons of mass destruction” and had operational links 
with Al-Qaeda have been proven false, no one can deny the 
repressive nature of his regime or the Iraqi people’s right to live 
freely. Unfortunately, American forces have been responsible for far 
more civilian in the nearly two years since the U.S. occupation 
began than during the final two years of Saddam’s regime. 

It may also be a means of silencing opposition. If, for example, the 
American public can actually be made to believe that the primary 
purpose of U.S. foreign policy under President Bush is to promote 
democracy, critics of Bush administration policy can therefore be 
depicted as not supporting democracy. Indeed, in the only reference 
President Bush made to critics of his policies in his inaugural 
address, he blithely dismissed them as those who have “questioned 
the global appeal of liberty.” 

President Bush promised that “All who live in tyranny and 
hopelessness can know: the United States will not ignore your 
oppression, or excuse your oppressors.” If this is actually the case, 
President Bush must immediately make it clear to all governments 
that oppress their own people or those under their military 
occupation: unless and until you respect human rights, including the 
rights of people to choose their own government, the United States 
will immediately cease all economic and security assistance, 
withdraw American advisors to your police and military, block all 
transfers of American armaments and other implements of 
repression, and encourage other countries to do the same. 

Unfortunately, there are currently no signs that President Bush is 
prepared to do this or that either party in Congress is willing to 
pressure him to do so. 

Unless or until that time comes, President Bush’s noble words at his 
inauguration can only be seen as self-serving hypocrisy of the worst 
kind. 

Stephen Zunes is a professor of Politics and chair of the Peace & 
Justice Studies Program at the University of San Francisco. He 
serves as Middle East editor for the Foreign Policy in Focus Project 
and is the author of Tinderbox: U.S. Middle East Policy and the 
Roots of Terrorism (Common Courage Press, 2003)

###
 

-- 
You are currently on Mha Atma's Earth Action Network email list, 
option D (up to 3 emails/day).  To be removed, or to switch options 
(option A - 1x/week, option B - 3/wk, option C - up to 1x/day, option 
D - up to 3x/day) please reply and let us know!  If someone 
forwarded you this email and you want to be on our list, send an 
email to ean at sbcglobal.net and tell us which option you'd like.


"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
   ---   George Orwell


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20050122/cd3a65bc/attachment.htm