7 - 13 February 2002
Issue No.572
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 7 - 13 February 2002 Issue No.572 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
A question of where and when
George W Bush is getting ready to unleash a new Afghanistan at any given time and his options are wide open, Thomas Gorguissian in Washington investigates
Declaring a "new cold war" -- or what some observers called "a permanent war" -- President George W Bush in last week's State of the Union speech stressed that the "war against terrorism" was still on. He singled out three nations as forming an "axis of evil" and mentioned the word "security" 19 times in the speech, which became the target of worldwide criticism and speculation. Americans and the rest of the world still remember how Ronald Reagan in 1983 declared that the Soviet Union was an "evil empire" and how its military buildup shaped the US's agenda and its strategies in the following years.
President George W Bush, standing behind a missile, waves to sevicemen as he visits Eglin Air Force Base in Florida. Many of the hi-tech weapons used in Afghanistan were tested at Eglin (photo:AP)
Similar actions and steps are expected now, in the coming months and years. And Bush's message seemed to be that America's allies should not be worried and troubled about President Bush's targeting of Iran, Iraq and North Korea as an "axis of evil."
National security adviser Condoleezza Rice told Fox News on Sunday, "I would say to everyone, let's step back here, and instead of worrying so much about what the president said Tuesday night [in his State of the Union address], let's put equal energy into working to make sure that these regimes don't get these weapons of mass destruction."
Rice, who is Bush's closest adviser, a few days ago outlined the ways and means to combat those three nations. She said the United States would "work to strengthen non-proliferation agreements and export controls," as well as use a "new and budding relationship with Russia" to try to prevent the "axis" countries from obtaining weapons materials and technology. Observers expect that a missile defence system will be a final part of the strategy.
President Bush has asked Congress for an increase of $48 billion in Pentagon spending for the next year. The extra money, as it was reported, will be pumped into making new fighter jets and high-tech munitions, providing salaries for military personnel and expanding health care benefits. This increase -- about 12 per cent -- will be the largest in 20 years. The current administration is planning a "military buildup rivalling that of the Reagan era," some observers suggested. The administration is seeking to increase the Pentagon's annual budget by $120 billion over the next five years to $451 billion in 2007.
Observers predict that Bush will face little opposition to implementing his doctrine. "The president will get largely what he asks for in this area," said Senator Kent Conrad, a Democrat from North Dakota, who is chairman of the Senate Budget Committee. The message is clear and the justification is present. "We're at war, and when the president asks for additional resources for national defence, he generally gets it," the senator said.
Recent national polls show that President Bush's approval rating is still high, and that more than 80 per cent of the public supports war, so opposing military spending would seem to be a political blunder.
Another member of the administration, Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld, appearing on ABC' s This Week, accused one of the "axis of evil" countries -- Iran -- of letting some Taliban and Al-Qa'eda members escape from Afghanistan. "The Iranians have not done what the Pakistani government has done -- put troops along the border to prevent terrorists from escaping from Afghanistan into their country," Rumsfeld said. But when he was asked if the United States planned to respond to Iran's actions, Rumsfeld said, "We don't announce things we're going to do before we do them."
In Munich, Deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz told a conference of global defence policy-makers, "Those countries that choose to tolerate terrorism and refuse to take action -- or worse, those that continue to support it -- will face consequences."
And, as is the case nowadays for most of the declared policies and stances, Wolfowitz did not elaborate on what action might be taken. Also, he did not name "those countries." When reporters asked Wolfowitz about US intentions toward Iraq, he said, "We've made no decisions about where we're going ... We're a long way from decisions about what to do." Many observers expect similar vague statements in the coming days to avoid any kind of confrontation -- especially with allies of the US. And observers predicted that Bush's tough talk in the State of the Union will make Secretary of State Colin Powell's job a lot harder.
Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, somewhat of a hawk herself, last Friday criticised the Bush administration's foreign policy and took aim at the president's labelling of Iran, Iraq and North Korea as an "axis of evil." In an interview with NBC, Albright said President Bush made a "big mistake" by lumping together Iran, Iraq and North Korea because "they are very different from each other."
Yet it was unclear whether she supports the policy of punishing those countries and others. Questioning and criticism came also from The New York Times. In an editorial entitled "The Limits of Power," the newspaper mentioned that: "The application of power and intimidation has returned to the forefront of American foreign policy," adding that Bush "appears to be developing an assertive new military doctrine that includes the threat of armed intervention against nations that are developing weapons that may put the United States in peril." The editorial criticised this "pre-emptive use of conventional force," saying that: "Traditionally, the United States has employed its military forces in retaliation for an attack rather than striking first itself. That should not preclude other options when there is a clear and present danger of attack, but firing first is not a step to be taken lightly."
The use of power and the talk about it led a senior administration official to say, "Military power is obviously one element of national power. But I warn that the United States is not going to have a one-size-fits-all policy here." The official also said in a published report, "We would make a mistake to assume the president is saying, 'I'm going to repeat Afghanistan everywhere else in the world'."
Meanwhile, speculation is rife about who, where, or when Washington will decide to attack.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page