America's campaign of alienation
*
On Saturday, 15 February, a man protesting against a potential United States- led attack on Iraq waved a US flag with a Nazi swastika emblazoned on it, as President George W Bush was likened to Adolf Hitler. Nothing new in the Arab world, you say? After all, this sort of image has been seen repeatedly in places like Iran or Iraq over the years. Not news, really, right?
It is news, though, and that is because the swastika-bearing US flag was not being waved at a demonstration in Tehran or Baghdad but in a city of a high profile US ally, France. That's right: a demonstrator in Paris was carrying the flag while tens of thousands of other Parisians carried various signs criticising and sometimes ridiculing the US leader because of his sustained push for an invasion of Iraq. That the Nazi-Hitler comparison is grossly inaccurate is really not the point. The point is that public anti- Americanism has been increasingly on the rise in the world, not only in the Middle East. And the French were hardly alone on a day when half a million people took to the streets on a very cold day in Berlin, Germany and about half a million were in force in London and nearly one million showed up in Rome to demonstrate against a potential war in Iraq, and when demonstrations were also held in Britain, Australia, South Korea, Russia, South Africa, Indonesia, Turkey, Iraq, Egypt, and all around the United States. It was a day of worldwide demonstrations whose numbers have been compared to protests against American involvement in Vietnam during the Vietnam War, and as in protests during the late 1960s through the mid-1970s, many of Saturday's demonstrations addressed the US government.
The Bush administration has admitted before that it has not been successful diplomatically, especially in regards to its policies in the Middle East -- that is, that it has not been effective in any sort of charm campaign to influence people to act as it wishes. What was once an honest but surprising admission from the administration is, at this point, an incredible understatement. Instead of influencing people (other than Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair, perhaps), the Bush administration's approach has led to growing anti-Americanism that has never before been expressed so intensely from key US allies, notably but not exclusively from France and Germany. French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhardt Schroeder have taken strong stands against US rhetoric and warnings regarding Iraq.
US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, not a man to back down from an opportunity for public sparring, attempted to undermine France's and Germany's lack of support for America's so-called war on terror by calling them part of "Old Europe" and tried to downplay their roles on the world stage. The great disagreement over Iraq has led to the worst relations between the US and Germany since Hitler was leader, and perhaps the worst ever between the US and France, relationships that have deteriorated quickly to such an extent that they have diverted attention from the usual areas of conflict involving the US, such as North Korea or the Middle East.
The US government has generally been able to get away from not addressing seriously the often negative way it is perceived in the Arab world because, well, it is the Arab world: the people and their culture are very different from America's; the governments there are undemocratic, oppressive regimes that control their people; they are jealous of America's model of democracy, America's technological innovations, its material success. We have been hearing the theories for some time, especially since 11 September, and while coming up with such excuses for why Arabs supposedly hate America have been made by Americans and supported by many people in the West, current conditions are different now that much of the anti-Americanism is being expressed by friends.
The US government can no longer afford to persist on its perilous course in regards to its foreign policy. It cannot afford to continue to dismiss criticism of its actions against and attitude towards the rest of the world. Much more harm, particularly in the long-term, can come from the alienation the US is causing than even from terrorist attacks against the US. Indeed, it can lead to greater incidents of terrorism. There are also possible consequences on Iraq's cooperation regarding its admission of UN weapons inspectors. Amidst growing public criticism and, at the very least, lack of world support for a US-led war against Iraq and for the US approach to the situation, how long will Hussein feel that he has to continue to accommodate American demands on his country?
Bush and members of his cabinet such as Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell have stated that they are willing to and capable of fighting Iraq alone, should the weapons inspectors' report to the United Nations not reveal what the US government insists Iraq possesses. It is true that the US military -- stronger even than during the Gulf War -- could, on its own, fight against and defeat Iraq, whose military is believed to be weaker than it was in 1991. Having the means, however, does not mean that military action should be taken, nor does an almost guaranteed quick victory justify it. It is time for the US to do what it, and any formidable power, does not like to do: listen. Listen to the concerns and suggestions of its friends who are also experts in world affairs. Listen to the voices of the millions of people in streets all over the globe, many standing in harsh weather and urging government officials to do the right thing. Acting in such a manner and not by resorting to war would signal the greatest show of strength. It could also show that the US can indeed be a model of democracy.
* The writer is a faculty member at the American University in Cairo.
Al-Ahram Weekly Online : 6 - 12 March 2003 (Issue No. 628)
Located at: http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2003/628/op8.htm