'Does Bush know why he is a threat to world peace?'

Trevor T. Kaita: 'Does Bush know why he is a threat to world peace?'
Date: Tuesday, December 02 @ 10:16:34 EST

Topic: Commander-In-Thief
By Trevor T. Kaita, All Africa

When explosions rocked the Turkish capital, Istanbul two weeks ago
killing more than 20 people and injuring an estimated 400 others, the
message to US President George W. Bush seemed to be "The war on terror
is not about to end we are everywhere".

Bush, who was on a state visit to the UK at the time, responded by
telling his British hosts that terrorism must be fought up to the end.

But given the path American has taken it is unlikely that terrorism
will be subdued. The US and reluctant allies seem to have taken a
conflict management path rather than conflicting transformation, which
implies handling the conflict from its roots through a long term
strategy of both social and structural change of society. By
neglecting the real disease and attending to its symptoms the US,
under Bush, has lost direction.

There are underlying issues those who are willing to blow themselves
up as they target Western targets. Interestingly, these terrorists as
they are mainly regarded in West, are called "martyrs" of the heroic
struggle to liberate the Middle East from the imperial designs of
America and others.

Conflict normally arises as a result of experienced injustice.
Injustice over a period of time can escalate into deep-rooted conflict
which if not well handled can explode into unending violence.

America is no angel in the eyes of the world; they created most of the
world's bloody dictatorial regimes that murdered millions of its
citizens. Saddam Hussein is one such result of this policy but when he
turned against the US it was the beginning of the end for him. The
price for his removal has been enormous, an estimated one and a half
million Iraqis (half of them children) died as a result of economic
sanctions, strongly backed by the US, against Iraq.

The number victims of the current war are not known but many civilians
have indeed lost lives in this conflict and continue to die.

The supposed weapons of mass destruction, that the Americans claimed
the Saddam regime possessed, and which were used to justify this war,
are nowhere in sight and the probability that they will be found
continues to diminish. Does America have any other justification of
occupying a sovereign state in this era?

Democracy is the answer usually given ... democracy, my foot! If the
US really wanted true democracy for Iraq then it would not be imposing
criminals on the Iraq people as leaders. Ahmed Chalabi, member of the
US-backed Iraqi governing council, is a convicted embezzler with a
22-year jail sentence waiting for him in Jordan. The man has
practically spent his entire life out of Iraq but in spite of there
facts, he remains Washington's favourite for the highest office in
Iraq.

Sounds democratic hmmm!

This double standards' trait of America where it deliberately
undermines the very gospel it preaches in the face of a silent but
observant world is a short-sighted policy.

It is true democratisation is the long-term answer to the terrorism
question because you hardly find terrorists in democratic societies.

Unfortunately though, this does not seem to get down so well with some
of America's foreign policy framers and as a result the country will
continue fighting the old order of undemocratic regimes it helped
create for a long time. The question of who wins this battle is still
in a balance.

Analysts predict that terrorism may accelerate during the Iraqi
occupation and situation reports from Baghdad back up this thinking.

The number of American soldiers dying is almost double those who died
during the war proper. And now the killing of Italian troops who were
in the country on purely humanitarian grounds in Nasiriyah rules out
any possibility of another country to committing troops to the Iraq
cause.

Bush must be a worried man; he knows that the more the media
dramatised and successful Gulf War, his father George Bush Sr still
lost the presidency. The electorate is getting impatient everyday as
pictures of their children dying in a foreign land are permanently
their sitting rooms.

The political opposition and the critics of this war keep reminding
the voters that it should have been avoided in the first place. As
this message sinks and more soldiers continue to die in Iraq
demonstrations are likely to rock most American cities. Bush could be
cornered, forced to withdraw US forces from Iraq and hand over Baghdad
to the UN.

What are the likely results of an American withdrawal?

Hell will break loose in Baghdad, as the scramble for power amongst
the Sunni, the Kurd and the Shia intensifies. The possibility of mass
death is not unlikely in the aftermath.

The key questions that need answering now are?

Why is America hated around the world?

Why do many people believe Bush is a threat to world peace? (60% of
the Britons interviewed for an opinion poll ahead of his visit to
Britain said the American president is a threat to world peace.) Why
are terrorists targeting America or its interests?

Where did their foreign policy go wrong?

Reprinted from All Africa:
http://allafrica.com/stories/200312010359.html

See also:
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/print.php?sid=13994