THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume VII, Issue # 218, October 2, 2005
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
WHO KILLED THE BUSH DOCTRINE?
By Michael Rubin
THE MIDDLE EAST & UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY: THE BUSH DOCTRINE -- DECLARATION THAT IT IS U.S. POLICY TO
SEEK & SUPPORT CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENTS & INSTITUTIONS IN EVERY NATION & CULTURE, WITH THE
ULTIMATE GOAL OF ENDING TYRANNY IN THE WORLD -- DEATH OF THE BUSH DOCTRINE THROUGH INEPTNESS & LACK OF WILL
FULL STORY:
On January 20, 2005, George W. Bush outlined the goal of his second term. "It is the policy of the United States to seek and
support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny
in our world," he said.
"All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: the United States
will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors. When you
stand for your liberty, we will stand with you."
Less than a year later, the Bush doctrine is dead, the victim not of outside circumstances, but rather ineptness and lack of will.
While Bush may be sincere, across the Middle East, his administration's willingness to sacrifice those seeking freedom has become
legendary.
Take Libya, for example. On March 12, 2004, Bush declared:
"We stand with courageous reformers ... Earlier today, the Libyan government
released Fathi el-Jahmi. He's a local government official who was imprisoned in
2002 for advocating free speech and democracy. It's an encouraging step toward
reform in Libya. You probably have heard, Libya is beginning to change her
attitude about a lot of things."
Actually, Libyan strongman Muammar Qadhafi had not changed. Two weeks later, Libyan security rearrested Jahmi. Across the
Middle East, analysts saw Qadhafi's actions as a challenge to Bush. The President responded, not by tying rapprochement to
El-Jahmi's freedom, but with impotence. As El-Jahmi rots in prison, denied medical care for his diabetes, the U.S. Treasury
Department grants waivers to allow billions of dollars of U.S. investment in Libya. According to the London-based Al-Hayat
newspaper, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will endorse Qadhafi's reign with a November visit to Tripoli.
The liberation of Iraq demonstrated that, after years of effete diplomacy, the White House meant what it said. Bush reversed that
victory.
It should be no surprise that Qadhafi has since gone on a rampage. In May, 2005, he imprisoned dissident writer Abdul Razzaq
al-Mansouri. In June, 2005, regime elements tortured to death dissident journalist Daif al-Ghazal. Hundreds of political prisoners
remain in Libyan jails.
The Bush administration also fumbled Lebanon. On March 8, 2005, Bush spoke at the National Defense University. "Today I have
a message for the people of Lebanon," he said.
"Lebanon's future will be in your hands. The American people
are on your side."
Perhaps many Americans were, but not the U.S. State Department.
When Condoleezza Rice visited Lebanon on July 22, she met not only with the new Prime Minister Fuad Siniora, but also with
pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud, the man whose quest for an extra-constitutional third term began the cascade that led to the
assassination of former Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri and sparked the Cedar Revolution. Syrian television, Hezbollah's Al-Manar
channel, and the Arabic-language satellite station Al-Jazeera all broadcast her handshake with the symbol of tyranny.
The Lebanese were not alone in their betrayal. Egyptians were aghast when, on September 11, new U.S. Ambassador Frank
Ricciardone appeared on Egyptian television and declared:
"Let me just reiterate the congratulations of the United States of America
to Egypt for this great accomplishment. As you know, President Bush has
telephoned President Mubarak ... to congratulate him and Egypt on the
accomplishments of this past election."
Four days earlier, Mubarak had declared victory in elections marred by harassment of opponents, fraud, and the state's refusal to
allow international monitors access. The Egyptian people, in protest, boycotted the polls. Voter turnout was only 20 percent. Rather
than support the Egyptian people, the President's representative fawned on a dictator. Sometimes, silence can be the best response.
Embrace of autocracy has become the rule, rather than the exception, in U.S. foreign policy. At the request of the Palestinian
Authority, the U.S. State Department banned Issam Abu Issa, a Palestinian anti-corruption activist slated to testify in the House of
Representatives.
Bush declared during his 2005 State of the Union Address, "To the Iranian people, I say tonight, as you stand for your own liberty,
America stands with you." But Rice appointed an ExxonMobil advisor to cover the State Department's Iran policy planning portfolio.
The ExxonMobil advisor advised against aiding Iranian dissidents.
Against the backdrop of Bush's indifference, Turkish democracy has taken a step backward. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan has both ignored rulings of the Turkish Supreme Court and retaliated against plaintiffs. After Turkish businessman Mustafa
Suzer won five lawsuits against the Turkish government for its illegal seizure of Kent Bank, Erdogan not only refused to abide by the
court verdict, but he also ordered a travel ban on Suzer and, without any court order, sent bulldozers to demolish a restaurant on his
property.
Emboldened by Washington's silence and frustrated at the constraints of an independent judiciary, the Turkish leader has used his
parliamentary majority to lower the retirement age of judges so that he can replace nearly half of Turkey's 9,000 judges before the next
election.
As they do with Bush, the chattering classes of Europe, those of Israel, and the American elite once criticized Reagan for his talk of
the "Evil Empire" and his willingness to endanger detente for the sake of a few dissidents. Reagan was right, though, and more than
two hundred million Soviets had a chance at freedom because of it.
Bush might have been equally successful. Images of Iraqis, Afghans, and Lebanese voting are more powerful than any terrorist car
bomb or al-Qa'ida video. Armchair experts may say Iraq's liberation emboldened terrorists. But the pages of Arabic newspapers like
Al-Sharq al-Awsat and Al-Hayat now carry an unprecedented debate about democracy, which experts said could not
happen. Liberals [democratic constitutionalists] may be a minority in the Arab world, but they have begun to find their voice.
Rice may echo the President, but, by embracing dictators, she has undercut the spirit of his message. Dissidents should not be
treated as ornaments, to be displayed when convenient, but kept at arm's length. They are the foundation of freedom. While Bush
might once have been remembered for bringing freedom to 30 million Afghans and 25 million Iraqis, his legacy is fast becoming one
of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
The Middle East -- Arabs, Arab States,
& Their Middle Eastern Neighbors
The Israeli-Arab Conflict
North Africa -- The Arab States
of Islamic North Africa
Egypt, Arabs, & the Middle East
The Middle East -- Lebanon as a Geopolitical Problem
The Middle East & the Problem of Iran
Turkey, the Middle East, & the U.S.A.
Islamism & Jihadism -- The Threat of Radical Islam
Page Three
Page Two
Page One
War & Peace in the Real World
Page Two
Page One
Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.
Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization
Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies
U.S. National Security Strategy
Michael Rubin, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, is Editor of the Middle East Quarterly.
The foregoing article by Michael Rubin was originally published in Haaretz, September 30, 2005, and can be found on the
Internet website maintained by the Middle East Forum.
Republished with Permission of the Middle East Forum
Reprinted from the Middle East Forum News
mefnews@meforum.org (MEF NEWS)
October 2, 2005
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume VII, 2005
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues