John McCarthy – Professor of German

Our semi-elected president has recast the White House as a monolithic institution: no openness, no dissent from stated policy is tolerated within its hallowed halls. Members of the Cabinet are expected to toe the line; if anyone shows signs of independent thought, he or she is quickly set to “the right.” Control is the operative word. Only the insiders are privy to all the information available. Those on the outside cannot be trusted. Yet the Bush Administration asks us to trust it unquestioningly.

This same insistence upon the closing of the ranks and trust is reflected in the infamous dictum to the American people and the world: “either you are with us, or you are against us.” Believe us because we are all powerful. War at all costs. No room for middle ground in George W. Bush’s black-and-white universe. As a consequence, dissenters from Bush’s fanatic insistence upon aggression are vilified as unpatriotic, old and loyal allies who urge cautious diplomacy are belittled as debilitated “old Europe,” the venerable institution of wise democratic process, the United Nation, is disrespectfully cast as a do-nothing body of word mongers, its authority accosted by a “rogue state.” In its rush to war, the Bush Administration is on its own jihad. Instead of seeking compromise and cooperation, the Administration seeks to manipulate through prejudice and fear, invoking the threat of imminent terrorist attack to influence public opinion. It would have us believe that Saddam Hussein is behind everything bad that might happen to the US.

If the logic of connecting Saddam to international terrorism is specious, it is at least in line with other illogical actions taken by the Bush Administration. The UN did not assign to the Bush Administration the role of Enforcer of UN resolution 1441. And who asked the US to be policeman of the world? How can we justify our aggressive acts as being committed in the name of democracy and peace, when we act secretly, disregard democratic due process, suspend citizen’s rights, and advocate pre-emptive strikes to thwart imagined future threats? And what of the illogic of the double standard toward Iraq and North Korea? The greater threat to world peace is North Korea. Yet, the Administration directs its venom at Iraq which is already contained.

Why act this way? In the wake of 9/11 the Bush Administration learned that the President’s poll numbers can be enhanced if the country is made to feel that it is at war. Traditionally, Americans rally behind the president in times of war regardless of party affiliation. If the Administration could achieve a permanent war status, then it could line up the populace like it did its White-House functionaries. A jaundiced view of White House tactics? In light of the White House’s established modus operandi, the theory is not outlandish. When it failed to make the promised progress on its war on terror, missing Osama Bin Laden who was wanted “dead or alive,” the Bush people sought a new target to maintain the sense of war urgency. Enter Saddam. Initially, the tactic worked. Leaders of the opposition party and independent thinkers within its own ranks were intimidated into silence if not compliance by being labeled “unpatriotic” and soft on terrorism. Then unconfirmed, secret informants prompt the Administration to cause a panic rush to hardware stores. The public has no way of judging how reliable the sources of information are because everything is kept under wraps. In fact, some alarming information proved to be false.

Secrecy is, of course, a trademark of the Bush Administration. But the ploy is wearing thin. The resistance to Bush’s jihad against Saddam is growing more public. But it may be too late. Bush will have his war. He has offended too many allies. He has weakened the Transatlantic Alliance and undermined the credibility of the UN through his repeated questioning of its resolve. He has provided too much fiery rhetoric to inspire America’s fanatic enemies by reinforcing the image of the Ugly American. He has boxed himself in so tightly that he has no room to maneuver, backdown, and save face. Through a preemptive strike, moreover, he will lose not only moral authority but also control of the situation. While George W. Bush will win his war in Iraq, he will have weakened America’s standing in the world and shaken the democratic principles of which we had been so proud. America will appear as the bully aggressor in most parts of the world, and this will open a Pandora’s Box. Good will toward America will have been misspent, even as it was squandered by the Bush Administration after 9/11. All that does not demonstrate strong and wise leadership.

Finally, by not realistically calculating the economic cost of the war and its aftermath, the Administration does a great disservice to the American people. The economy has steadily declined since George W. Bush took office. War talk sends jitters throughout the system. Every proposal to cut taxes while spending more worsens the situation. No wise leadership on that front either. The moral, political, and economic costs of Bush’s “leadership” are much too high. The last time the chosen listened to a bush, they wandered in the desert for forty years. What will our fate be?