Bush's Re-election Strategy
Ahmed Nassef
A string of disturbing events over the past week may point to the Bush campaign's real reelection strategy. Short of bringing peace and harmony to Iraq or eliminating the gargantuan national deficit, two highly unlikely occurrences, the Bush team is desperate for a home run issue in November. The developments of the past few days, while unconnected on the surface, are just what the Bush campaign ordered.
The killing of Hamas leader Abdel Aziz Rantisi over the weekend comes on the heals of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's triumphant visit to Washington, DC, where he gained the enthusiastic official US approval for breaking international law.
It's hard to imagine that the Bush/Sharon lovefest didn't include a green light for the latest Israeli extra-judicial killing.
But if Sharon didn't mention it when he met with our brain-challenged fearless leader, why should he have bothered anyway.
He had just killed Hamas spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin a few short weeks before, and look what that got him--a hero's welcome at the White House and an erasure of decades of international agreements.
As Stephen Zunes reminds us, George W. Bush this past week has effectively torn up UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 (calling on Israel to withdraw to pre-1967 borders and for a 'just settlement' for Palestinian refugees); 446, 455, 465 and 471 (calling for the removal of all Israeli settlements from the Occupied Territories); and the Fourth Geneva Conventions (which prohibits the transfer of civilians onto territories seized by military force).
It's only right that this deal was reportedly hatched as a result of 'negotiations' between Elliot Abrams and Ariel Sharon, the first a convicted felon, the latter a mass murderer.
So now, the man who barely a year ago was calling on the UN to enforce its resolutions against Iraq, as if it should be any surprise, has decided to come right out and trample not only on half a dozen UN Security Council resolutions, but also on longstanding US foreign policy.
But that was one whole year ago, after all, and the American electorate can barely remember what it had for lunch yesterday.
But this past week was remarkable not because of the Bush administration's contempt for international law and basic decency--that was made clear to most people in the world during the run up to the Iraq invasion--it was extraordinary because it marked the terrible unveiling of the Bush reelection campaign strategy.
Let's take a quick survey of some key events of the past week.
First campaign stop--Iraq. While continuing to battle Sunni resistance fighters, the US decided to open a new front the week prior against Moqtada al-Sadr and his Shi'i supporters by shutting down his newspaper, arresting its editor, and issuing an arrest warrant for al-Sadr himself. As a result, Iraqi Shi'is and Sunnis begin to unite against the US military's heavy-handed tactics in Fallujah. Despite suffering the heaviest casualties since the invasion, the US continues to press on, surrounding the Shi'i holy city of Najaf with a mandate to get al-Sadr 'dead or alive.'
A reasonable person might wonder why the US may want to provoke al-Sadr, and Iraq's Shi'i population with him, at this particular juncture, when they face enough trouble.
The mess in Iraq is only getting messier, but the Bush administration seems to be deliberately calling out to the ever-increasing numbers of desperate and frustrated Iraqis and saying, 'Bring it on.'
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, President Bush was finishing up a much-needed extended Easter vacation when Egyptian President Husni Mubarak came by for a visit to Crawford, Texas Monday. Mubarak, the aging dictator (as in, he might be an asshole, but he's our asshole) of the Arab world's most populous country, came by for the usual 'distinguished statesman' photo op intended for the tired front pages of semi-official newspapers back home (and of course to beg for some moneyc loans... loan guarantees... anything to fix a couple of planks in the huge shipwreck that is the Egyptian economy).
Mubarak got the photo ops he wanted, and apparently enough cash for a few extra nights at the Houston Intercontinental for him and his entourage. The poor guy was still in Texas when he got a call from Secretary of State Colin Powell on Tuesday telling him of President Bush's intention of presenting the West Bank on a platter to Ariel Sharon the following day.
The people in Peoria may not care, but this won't play well in Cairo, that's for sure.
But why did Bush decide to drop the pro-Sharon bombshell at a time that would also produce maximum embarrassment to his most important Arab ally? Again, as with the curious moves in Iraq, a reasonable person might see this as counterintuitive. Why would Bush want to help create another mess in Egypt, a country of over 70 million people, when he already has his hands full in Iraq (and Afghanistan, lest we forget).
Then the kicker. One day after Bush's glowing endorsement of his plan, Sharon orders the hit on Hamas' Rantisi.
Why so soon after the trip to Washington? One would expect that perhaps good ol' Elliot Abrams would have told his friend Ariel to wait another week or two so that it does not seem so... obvious.
And it is obvious. Sharon timed Rantisi's assassination to make a clear statement to Arabs: made in the USA.
Certainly, the week's developments concerning Iraq and Israel/Palestine can be blamed on severe diplomatic and strategic incompetence on the part of the Bush administration.
That kind of assessment presumes that this Administration is run by generally well-meaning people who may not have a clue, but who at least have the interest of the American people at heart.
Yet all the evidence points to the fact that the week's series of events were carefully timed.
Al-Sadr formed his militia last summer, not last week, and the newly issued arrest warrant was for a crime that took place last year. Nothing changed to cause the US to react at this specific time.
The same goes for the Bush policy on Israel/Palestine. Abrams' talks with Sharon to prepare for the President's announcement b egan in November of last year. And it's no accident that Sharon's White House visit came immediately after Mubarak's stop at the ranch.
Most notably, the week's events fit perfectly within the Bush Administration 's three-year record in the Middle East.
In an inte rview back in October 2001 about the then-impending US war against Afghanistan, Mohamed Heikal, one of the Arab world's most respected political analysts, presciently told the UK's Guardian, 'I have seen Afghanistan, and there is not one target deserving the $1m that a cruise missile costs, not even the royal palace. If I took it at face value, I would think this is madness, so I assume they have a plan and this is only the first stage.'
Of course, as the world soon found out, there was a plan, and it winds its way through Iraq and from there, to the rest of the resource-rich Arab world, in order to establish the dominion of Halliburton-style democracy.
Paul Wolfowitz and his fellow neocons in this Administration have shaped their Middle East policy around the brilliant premise that the US should start treating Arab governments like the spineless, mindless bunch of sheep that they are. The US knows that none of these governments have any legitimacy with their own people--they certainly should know since they helped create most of them. These governments exist by virtue of the military and/or financial might of the United States. So why on earth pay them any mind. Just go about your own business old chap.
Now it's election time, and Karl Rove and his crew know that this President has nothing going for him except the prospect of spreading fear in Americans' minds. If the majority had a problem with him last time, then he' s really in trouble this time around, unless he can get back on firm war footing once again.
When President Bush told Iraqi guerillas to go ahead and 'bring it on,' he meant it. And just in case the Iraqis don't bring it on, he must have thought, then let the Palestinians, or the Egyptians, or heck, even those tree-hugging Canadians for all I care. He needs his war, a war that is never-ending, or at least one that can take long enough so that brother Jeb can make himself at home too on Pennsylvania Avenue one of these days.
Now the scene is set for the next calamity, God help us. And it is all being played out for us ever so subtly on our TV screens.
If it comes, do you think there will be anything standing in the way of Patriot Act 2, or perhaps by then we can skip directly to Patriot Act 3.
Remember, You are either with us, or with the terrorists.
The Spaniards were smart enough to cut through the double-speak.
Will we?
Will we get the chance?
zmag.org
lurqer |
