|
Critics Warn Bush Speech Could Undermine U.S. Interests
 |
| Bush’s address is expected to harm American interests in the Muslim and Arab worlds |
WASHINGTON, Jan. 30 (IslamOnline) – U.S. President George W. Bush's "State of the Union" address is drawing mostly negative reviews from some analysts, who warn that the administration's aggressive policies towards Iran, Iraq and Muslim organizations could undermine the current war against terrorism and U.S. interests in the region.
In his Tuesday night address, Bush described Iran, Iraq and North Korea as "an axis of evil," specifically as nations supporting international terrorism. He also identified groups such as Hamas, Hizbollah, Islamic Jihad and Jaish-e-Mohammed as part of a "terrorist underworld" that Washington would confront.
"Thanks to the work of our law enforcement officials and coalition partners, hundreds of terrorists have been arrested," Bush told a national television audience. "Yet, tens of thousands of trained terrorists are still at large.
“These enemies view the entire world as a battlefield, and we must pursue them wherever they are. So long as training camps operate, so long as nations harbor terrorists, freedom is at risk. And America and our allies must not, and will not, allow it."
The U.S. leader claimed that international terrorists aligned with Saudi exile Osama bin Laden were operating in Bosnia, the Philippines and Somalia. Bush said that if host governments did not eliminate these groups, Washington would.
Some analysts who saw the speech were unimpressed.
"President Bush is trying to enhance his popularity by dodging the issue that neither Osama bin Laden or Mullah Omar have been captured," said Tahseen Bashir, a former Egyptian representative to the United Nations and a political commentator in Cairo. "He's seeing the world where there is only the Taliban or Al-Qaeda and projecting this on other issues which are not related."
Bashir claimed the Bush administration was trying to draw similarities between its declared war on terrorism in Afghanistan and continuing Israeli-Palestinian violence.
"Palestine has nothing to do with Afghanistan," added Bashir. "Palestine is a colonial occupation. To apply the logic of anti-terrorism there is totally fallacious. The only terrorism there is the state-sponsored terrorism of the [Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel] Sharon government against the Palestinians."
Bashir argued that the Bush administration was encouraging further military escalation by Israel against the Palestinians, which was "not in the best interest of the United States, Israel or the Arabs."
Bush also spoke out forcefully against the regime of Iraqi President, Saddam Hussein.
"Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror," said Bush. "The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens - leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections - then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world."
Some high-ranking administration officials are pushing for a U.S. military campaign to oust Saddam Hussein in wake of the deadly September 11 attacks, even though there appears to be no intelligence linking Baghdad to the attacks.
Nonetheless, the administration's declared campaign to root out international terrorism was a significant part of Bush's annual address to Congress.
Geoffrey Aronson, director of the Foundation for Middle East Peace, in Washington, D.C., said Bush's 48-minute address was a speech to two audiences, both domestic and foreign.
"I think he gave an accurate portrayal of what the American people are talking about as the next stage of what is going on in Afghanistan," said Aronson. "Afghanistan is not a one chapter story. There are other chapters, specifically Iraq and Iran. And there are constituencies that have been arguing for a more aggressive stance against both for some time. [Bush's] speech has given a new sense of urgency."
Aronson said Bush's address had put "countries on notice that America doesn't appear satisfied with simply punishing the Taliban for hiding Al-Qaeda. The administration is signaling that it intends to broaden this war against terrorism, although we don't know the details."
He added that he didn't think many people in the Arab and Muslim world would be happy with much of what Bush had to say and that some of his comments might evoke great fears that Washington intends to "carry the war closer to countries near them."
Aronson said that although it was clear that Bush and Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, saw eye-to-eye on many perceived regional threats, such as Iran and Iraq, the President's remarks also said there may be some fears within Israel that a future U.S. military campaign could involve the Israel as well.
Philip Mattar, a fellow at the Wilson Center in Washington, D.C., said he was discouraged that Bush mentioned Iran, which has been pursuing a gradual rapprochement with Washington for the past few years.
"Iran aggressively pursues these weapons and exports terror," claimed Bush, "while an un-elected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom."
Mattar said Tuesday’s comments sent the wrong message to Iranian President, Mohamed Khatami.
"How unfortunate it is to single out Iran," said Mattar, "because they've actually been a moderating influence and they been pushing their own political reforms. And here it is that he [Bush] is undermining Khatami."
Bush's statements against Iran came hours after Afghanistan's interim leader, Hamid Karzai, had told a Washington audience that Iran had offered substantial economic assistance and good relations with his new government. Karzai, who is making an official visit to Washington, was a guest of honor at Bush's address before a joint session of Congress.
Hisham Shirabi, a noted Palestinian professor emeritus at Georgetown University, said Bush's speech was a "continuation of a belligerent attitude." He said the reaction within the Middle East would be "more anger, more frustration and more distrust" of U.S. policies than before.
Shirabi questioned how Bush could single out Lebanon's Hizbollah or Palestine's Hamas and Islamic Jihad at a time when Israeli military forces were inflicting heavy losses in their attempt to continue their long occupation of Arab lands.
"How can he identify Hizbollah as terrorist, which is part of the political structure of Lebanon and has wide support and admiration within the country's society?" Shirabi asked.
"How can he attack the Palestinians," he added, "who are fighting for freedom and an end to the occupation? At the same time, [Bush] is saying nothing about the terrorism of the Israelis, which is being described in the Israeli press by Israeli officers and soldiers serving in the West Bank and Gaza, who say they are committing acts which are crimes against humanity."
Shirabi, who recently returned from the region, said the Bush stance toward terrorism would do more to harm American interests in the Muslim and Arab worlds, as well as undermine governments that are closely allied with Washington.
|
