Zaman,
Turkey
After Punishing Week at U.N., Bush Still Doesn't Get It
By Ali H. Aslan
September 25, 2006
Turkey - Zaman - Original Article (English)
President Hugo Chavez Addresses the 61st session of the
U.N. General Assembly. He backed Iran's right to a nuclear
program, and called President Bush a 'tyrant' and a 'liar.' (above).
—UNITED NATIONS VIDEO: Venezuela's President Hugo
Chavez
addresses the opening of
the 61st session of the
U.N.
General Assembly, Sept. 20,
00:23:50
—UNITED NATIONS VIDEO: Iran's President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad addresses the opening of the 61st session
of the U.N.
General Assembly, Sept. 19,
00:31:00
Iran's President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad awaits his turn to speak
at the
opening of
the 61st session of the U.N.
General Assembly. (below).
President Bush, the man President Chavez referred to as
'El Diablo,' delivers his speeach to the opening of the 61st
session of the U.N. General Assembly, Sept. 19. (above).
—UNITED NATIONS VIDEO: President George Bush's
speech at the opening of the 61st session of the U.N.
General Assembly, Sept. 19, 00:20:50
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ISTANBUL: If it weren't for the Bush administration's grave error,
perhaps September 11th would be remembered as a common day of commemoration, a
day when the entire world condemns terrorism.
But just after the 5th anniversary of the terror attacks at the
annual U.N General Assembly, it was clear that the sympathy that America had
gained after September 11, 2001 has now turned to antipathy.
Of course, anti-American tirades from the usual suspects like
Chavez of Venezuela Watch and Ahmadinejad of Iran Watch were no
surprise. What was surprising was that a majority of U.N. members wholeheartedly
applauded them. When Chavez described Bush as a "The Devil," many
U.N. diplomats didn't appear the slightest bit distressed; to the contrary,
they couldn't help laughing. And you can be sure that those who didn't have the
courage to chuckle openly were laughing under their breath. These members chose
more diplomatic ways of expressing what Chavez and Ahmadinejad had said. "Democracy
cannot be forced" became the universal consensus.
As for me, I laughed the most at U.S. State Department Spokesman
Sean McCormack's statement, "It was a good week for American diplomacy."
If McCormack meant that Rice was able to convince her boss, Bush, to be a
little more balanced and calm in his U.N. address, then he's right. Perhaps it
can be said that the diplomatic community, which has had difficulty reining in
its cowboy President over recent years, had a local success. But if he's
claiming that it was a good week for the U.S. from the angle of tangible
benefits to it, and if he genuinely believed this, I would be quite surprised.
At the General Assembly, one could say that Washington either left
empty-handed or took a step backward in terms of the most important issues it
has wanted to resolve. For example, they found no support for the idea of
enforcing an embargo against Iran over to its nuclear program. Half-heartedly
but helplessly, the U.S. agreed to give Tehran more time. The U.S. effort to obtain
international intervention in Darfur, which they call a genocide,
also had no results. And even from its closest NATO allies, Washington isn't
getting the degree of assistance it wants against the Taliban uprising that
flared up in Afghanistan. In Iraq, it has come face-to-face with its destiny.
In short, by displaying at least passive resistance on many issues important to
the U.S., the world is in fact punishing the Bush Administration. It is forming
an anti-U.S. bloc.
This silent but effective resistance the world is applying against
the Bush Administration is leading to differing reactions in Washington.
Instead of learning a lesson, White House supported think-tanks are becoming
even more obstinate, particularly the neocons and the right-wing Israeli lobby.
As for more moderate groups, they are now beginning to find the courage to
speak out against the attitudes that have led to the deep diplomatic
helplessness that the U.S. has fallen victim to.
For example, despite all the protests of Secretary of State Rice
and some Israeli lobbyists, the Council on Foreign Relations' gave Iranian
President Ahmadinejad an opportunity to speak. This was a significant example
of moral courage. Chairman Richard Haass explained that "opening the doors"
of the Council to someone that many Jews have compared to Hitler this way: "The
United States gets itself in trouble when it limits its options and approaches
diplomacy as a value judgment. It's not obvious to me, looking at the last 50
or 60 years, that we paid a price for talking to the Soviets. At the end of all
the talking, we won the Cold War."
If this approach by Dr. Haass, who was the director of Political Planning
at the State Department during Bush's first term, had been dominant in Bush Administration
today, neither the United States nor the world would now have such a tremendous
headache. One can't say, "I won't talk to people I don't like; I'll just overthrow
the regime with preventive attacks or by secret means and all will be fine."
Even if you are a superpower, you can't do this. Even the U.S., which covers
almost a third of the U.N. budget, can't prevent itself from ridicule and
insult at that institution. Its authority does not equal its contribution. If
it does, it is only through the use of force.
Bush to Uncle Sam: 'I wants to improve my image.'
Uncle Sam to Bush: 'We can do nothing to improve it. It needs to be replaced.'
[Ad Dustour, Jordan].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diplomacy is the art of not cutting off dialogue with an
enemy, drinking coffee with your adversaries when necessary and trying to will
goodwill by sharing credit with others. But if a cup of coffee is worth 40
years of warm feeling, a bomb does 40 years of damage. For this reason, calls
are increasing in the United States to remove obstacles to direct talks with
the Iranian regime, which eagerly wants dialogue, and for Bush to keep his
bombs in his pocket.
A peaceful solution to dispute between the U.S. and Iran would
make the entire world more comfortable, including Turkey. If the Democrats take
over Congress in the November elections, Bush's margin for hasty action will
decrease. I hope he has learned his lesson in Iraq. But unfortunately due to
Bush's character, no one can be certain that he will forego a fight with Iran
or the world.