Obama Forced to Live Bush’s Dream
The terror attacks against New York and Washington on Sept. 11 revealed a new threat against the Western world. The otherwise isolationist George W. Bush entered into two wars, one to wipe out al-Qaida and the other to deter the world's rogue regimes from developing the capacity for large-scale terrorism.
There was, however, another long-term goal. The Bush administration believed that terrorism could be vanquished by bringing democratic governance to the people of the Middle East. Bush was convinced that the desire for freedom was universal, that Muslims and Arabs were driven by the same yearning as others. For this belief he received sharp criticism, but he persisted in this line of thinking anyway and mired the USA in an infinitely difficult — and unfortunately often mismanaged — nation-building exercise in hostile territory.
George W. Bush hoped that free elections in Iraq would lead to a domino effect in the Middle East. It never came about. Instead, a barely legitimate government was formed in Iraq, and the tiny embryo of the domino effect, as seen in the Cedar Revolution in Lebanon and several democratically-minded reforms in a handful of other nations, seemed to have petered out.
Barack Obama was elected president on the promise, among other things, to not be George W. Bush. The war escapades would be brought to an end; the Arab world’s despots would be persuaded to nobler ideals via dialogue.
It never came about. During the past two months, the Middle East has been swept by a wave of freedom that can only be compared to the time before the fall of the Iron Curtain. In the West by the Atlantic coast, in Morocco, demonstrators have forced King Mohammed to enter into political reforms. On the other side of Africa, on the Arabian Peninsula’s east side, in Bahrain, King Hamad has received the help of Saudi troops to protect against the insurgency. To the north by the Mediterranean Sea, in closed-off Syria, demonstrators have set the ruling Arab socialist Baath party’s localities ablaze. To the south by the Arabian Sea, in feudal Yemen, several ministers have aligned themselves with the opposition; yes, even in tiny Djibouti there have been protests. And in the epicenter, Egypt, a general election will be held. The constitution will be changed, transitioning from Hosni Mubarak’s dictatorship to something new. It seems the Jasmine Revolution cannot be stopped
When any one tries [to stay], for instance like Col. Moammar Gadhafi, demands are immediately raised for the outside world — the USA — to intervene.
It is George W. Bush’s dream. But it is Barack Obama who is forced to live it.
It is one of the reasons why the efforts in Libya have come so late that Gadhafi almost had time to wipe out the rebel movement entirely. It is also why the U.S., after the initial days of fighting when American firepower has been so crucial, will hand over responsibility for the maintenance of the no-fly zone to allied countries. Obama desires ultimately that the USA abdicate the role of global leader.
What signals would have been sent to the demonstrators in other countries if the USA had ignored the pleas from the rebels who were being slaughtered by Gadhafi? What signals would have been sent to other despots if the USA had left Gadhafi’s bloodbath without redress?
This is what a world without the USA would look like: Cries for help would sound unheeded. There wouldn’t even have been a cry for help, since Gadhafi would have had nuclear weapons (had George W. Bush not used the whip to persuade Gadhafi to scrap his atomic program) and, accordingly, would have been impossible to influence.
No one knows how it’s going to end. It is far from certain that the region will become democratic. But the Jasmine Revolution is one of the most hopeful developments the Arab world has seen. And the protest movement can only survive under the assumption that the USA stands at the ready to back it up.
There was, however, another long-term goal. The Bush administration believed that terrorism could be vanquished by bringing democratic governance to the people of the Middle East. Bush was convinced that the desire for freedom was universal, that Muslims and Arabs were driven by the same yearning as others. For this belief he received sharp criticism, but he persisted in this line of thinking anyway and mired the USA in an infinitely difficult — and unfortunately often mismanaged — nation-building exercise in hostile territory.
George W. Bush hoped that free elections in Iraq would lead to a domino effect in the Middle East. It never came about. Instead, a barely legitimate government was formed in Iraq, and the tiny embryo of the domino effect, as seen in the Cedar Revolution in Lebanon and several democratically-minded reforms in a handful of other nations, seemed to have petered out.
Barack Obama was elected president on the promise, among other things, to not be George W. Bush. The war escapades would be brought to an end; the Arab world’s despots would be persuaded to nobler ideals via dialogue.
It never came about. During the past two months, the Middle East has been swept by a wave of freedom that can only be compared to the time before the fall of the Iron Curtain. In the West by the Atlantic coast, in Morocco, demonstrators have forced King Mohammed to enter into political reforms. On the other side of Africa, on the Arabian Peninsula’s east side, in Bahrain, King Hamad has received the help of Saudi troops to protect against the insurgency. To the north by the Mediterranean Sea, in closed-off Syria, demonstrators have set the ruling Arab socialist Baath party’s localities ablaze. To the south by the Arabian Sea, in feudal Yemen, several ministers have aligned themselves with the opposition; yes, even in tiny Djibouti there have been protests. And in the epicenter, Egypt, a general election will be held. The constitution will be changed, transitioning from Hosni Mubarak’s dictatorship to something new. It seems the Jasmine Revolution cannot be stopped
When any one tries [to stay], for instance like Col. Moammar Gadhafi, demands are immediately raised for the outside world — the USA — to intervene.
It is George W. Bush’s dream. But it is Barack Obama who is forced to live it.
It is one of the reasons why the efforts in Libya have come so late that Gadhafi almost had time to wipe out the rebel movement entirely. It is also why the U.S., after the initial days of fighting when American firepower has been so crucial, will hand over responsibility for the maintenance of the no-fly zone to allied countries. Obama desires ultimately that the USA abdicate the role of global leader.
What signals would have been sent to the demonstrators in other countries if the USA had ignored the pleas from the rebels who were being slaughtered by Gadhafi? What signals would have been sent to other despots if the USA had left Gadhafi’s bloodbath without redress?
This is what a world without the USA would look like: Cries for help would sound unheeded. There wouldn’t even have been a cry for help, since Gadhafi would have had nuclear weapons (had George W. Bush not used the whip to persuade Gadhafi to scrap his atomic program) and, accordingly, would have been impossible to influence.
No one knows how it’s going to end. It is far from certain that the region will become democratic. But the Jasmine Revolution is one of the most hopeful developments the Arab world has seen. And the protest movement can only survive under the assumption that the USA stands at the ready to back it up.