As
Kerry's pounding on the failures of the Bush administration landed
results in the polls, the long shadow of Cheney re-emerged-meaning
we face eight more months of cold in this winter of political discontent.
Recently,
Cheney attacked Kerry for reportedly claiming that the current
"coalition" of countries in Iraq was "bribed and
coerced" into committing troops to the coalition.
"If such dismissive terms are the vernacular of the golden
age of diplomacy Senator Kerry promises," Cheney fumed, "we
are left to wonder which nations would care to join any future
coalition."
Cheney's
comments reflect the precarious path facing the Bush administration
in the wake of a faltering economy and the quagmire it created
in Iraq. Attack Kerry, the administration seems to be saying,
for insulting our new friends who supported us in Iraq.
But
it was Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, after all, who shattered
NATO one year ago with his contemptuous characterization of France,
Germany and others as "Old Europe," simply because they
failed to see eye-to-eye with the administration on the war.
Over a period of days, if not hours, he and other Bush-men poisoned
allegiances crafted generations ago. Rumsfeld's subsequent coronation
of Spain and others as "New Europe" further insulted
people across the continent, including Russian President Vladimir
Putin. Membership to Club Iraq came with a one-way ticket to Baghdad
and a boatload of bank notes, so demonizing Kerry for telling
the truth about the arrangement is not without its own risks for
the Bush administration.
The
ramblings of Cheney and others serve to remind us all that, as
Boston Globe columnist Robert Kuttner recently wrote, "mud
tossed at Kerry might stick to Bush." Since "such dismissive
terms" are the vernacular of the Bush administration —
it's hard to see how Cheney and his Spiro Agnew-like attacks will
win the day, or the election, for that matter.
As
the United States backpedals and clumsily reaches out to Old Europe
in an attempt to garner support for rebuilding Iraq — and
the president's foundering re-election campaign — don't be
surprised to see more of New Europe's leaders pull out of the
effort in Iraq, as Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski, a
key U.S. ally, hinted Thursday.
And
we can expect to hear a few barbs tossed back at the president
for his mishandling of the war and the "peace" in Iraq,
as the vast majority of Europeans feel that the war has hurt the
war on terrorism. For these and other reasons, what was thought
to be a Bush cakewalk to re-election a few months back now will
be a tough race, threatened by the very war the president was
obsessed with executing.
Talk
about instant karma.
Real
friends are supposed to listen to one another with consideration
and respect. When a cacophony of nations — all of whom have
displayed loyalty to the United States in the past decades —
begged us not to go to war with Iraq, All the President's Men
couldn't wait to tell the rumor mill that France had violated
the embargo on Iraq and "supplied the Iraqis with chemicals
and other materials." This still-unsubstantiated charge was
supplied as the reason the French did not want us to go to war.
In
addition, more than one retired military officer made it plain
to the media and others that once the major fighting ceased, we
not only would find weapons of mass destruction, but French and
Russian complicity with Iraq as well.
It
would become another in the long list of outlandish charges disproved
in time.
Recall
that all that the United Nations asked of the Bush administration
was to give the inspectors "a few more months" to do
their work. These were the same friends who supported the war
on terror — and the war in Afghanistan after Sept. 11 —
but the Bush administration decided to bully our nation's most
important allies in public forums, deriding them as cowards and
disloyal profiteers.
ONE
YEAR LATER, Vice President Cheney mocks Kerry for his ideas regarding
a "golden age of diplomacy," revealing the continental
divide between America and Europe once again.
But
by failing to build broad international support for the war and
for the reconstruction effort, the Bush administration now appears
as homeless beggars, hat in hand, asking for spare change from
the very people they spat on during the war's early days. Clearly,
the people of Old Europe have not changed their position on the
war, as 80 percent still oppose it. Whether a shift against the
war actually sways the electorate away from Bush here in the United
States remains to be seen, but they now must see that our old
friends were right — our venture into Iraq has created more
terror, not less.
They
must know by now that if they simply had concentrated on securing
and enabling a real democracy in Afghanistan, the Bush administration
likely would have achieved what it wanted: a "beacon of democracy"
in the Arab world — Afghan style — a more unified world
fighting terrorism and an easy re-election campaign.
Instead,
Bush, having squandered the genuine, widespread warmth and support
that came after Sept. 11, is on new and dangerous turf —
some might call it quicksand — as he approaches the November
elections.
Kevin
P. Miller is an award-winning writer/producer from Cleveland,
Ohio.
|
advertisement
