Click here to go to home page



Specter of Iraq haunts Bush trip

Would-be world emperor forced to tone down rhetoric

Published Feb 24, 2005 7:51 PM

The president of the United States got another reminder this week that it takes more than having the world's biggest weapons to make an aggressive, expansionist foreign policy produce the desired results.

The scripting of George W. Bush's trip to Europe was flawless. Everything was arranged in advance to manufacture the image required by a regime aspiring to world leadership, nay, world domination: unassailable strength tempered with compassion and a folksy touch. How many hours did he spend being coached on how to press his agenda firmly but in a way that would bring the European heads of state on board with his agenda for Iraq, Iran, Syria, Palestine and North Korea?

His enormous security apparatus did their jobs. In the German city of Mainz, for example, the police welded shut 1,300 manhole covers so the presidential motorcade of 80 vehicles could drive through the streets without fear of being bombed. A scheduled town hall meeting with "regular German citizens" was cancelled after the German government told Bush's staff that it couldn't guarantee friendly questions. (Washington Post, Feb. 23)

This is the same city where his father, Bush I, was once welcomed by cheering crowds. It seems so long ago.

The cameras of CNN, Fox and the rest of the corporate media didn't focus on the empty streets--empty except where thousands of demonstrators gathered with banners reading "Bush No. 1 terrorist." They accentuated the positive, showing Bush smiling alongside Jacques Chirac of France, Gerhard Schroeder of Germany and Tony Blair of Britain.

Those who looked closely, however, couldn't fail to notice Bush's body language--tense, the smile pasted on his face. It was almost like a flashback to the days when the embattled Richard Nixon smiled and flashed the victory sign even while being booed to high heaven by hostile crowds. Nixon knew the cameras would dutifully focus on him, not his opponents, and editors would cut out the background noise.

A colossus with feet of clay?

In some ways, Bush might seem at the height of his power. His party managed, by hook or by crook, to get him elected to a second term. The voting in Iraq that he promised would usher in a period of stability and "nation-building" has taken place.

The loyal "opposition" at home, the Democrats, endorsed his Iraq and Afghan wars, as well as the Patriot Act, the creation of an expensive new police agency--the Department of Homeland Security, and of an "intelligence czar" to have authority over 15 already existing spy agencies. They even seem to be ready to accept John Negroponte in the post of national intelligence director, despite his odious history as a facilitator of death-squad repression in countries like Honduras.

So why has Bush forsaken his triumphalist demeanor? Why is he actually speaking of an "equal partnership" with Europe--the "old Europe" he dismissed so breezily not very long ago? Why is he actually eating french fries?

It's always important to remember that Bush is not just a cocky, power-hungry individual but someone groomed for many years to represent the interests of the gold-plated U.S. ruling class, which owes its vast fortunes to the exploitation of the increasingly multi-national working class at home and the intense, super-exploitation of hundreds of millions of workers in oppressed countries around the world.

To them, an imperialist war like the one in Iraq is fully justified, no matter how dirty it is, if it succeeds in protecting and expanding their investments and their ability to suck out the resources and labor of other countries at the lowest possible cost. They don't mind corporations like Halliburton getting close to the presidency and skimming off extra gravy for themselves as long as it all works to enhance the interests of their class as a whole.

But what if it doesn't? What if the resistance of the Iraqi people to being recolonized turns what was anticipated to be a short, brutal victory into a long tunnel with no light at the end? What if that spirit of resistance begins appearing in more and more places around the world?

What if the reluctance of the population at home to fight and die for empire makes it ever more difficult to get the needed bodies for their expensive war machine?

And what if the decades-long preoccupation with building the biggest, baddest, most technologically advanced military machine of all, and borrowing trillions to pay for it, is actually hurting their competitive edge in the world capitalist market, instead of enhancing it?

A flash of heat lightning

At the very moment that Bush was beginning his European trip, the financial markets got a rude shock. They heard that the Bank of Korea might start shifting its holdings into other currencies besides the dollar. The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 150 points that day.

At one time, the various brokers and financial managers who analyze market trends would probably have laughed disparagingly if anyone suggested that a decision made by a bank in South Korea could shake them up. Their chauvinism was unmitigated. But the world has changed.

The huge foreign debt of the U.S. has greatly eroded its currency, and speculation has been rife for quite a while that institutions in other countries holding large amounts of U.S. dollars might begin to exchange them for something more stable, like the euro. A move by the Korean bank might be just the first shift in what could become an avalanche.

A lot of people in the financial world know this and are holding their breath.

So there was Bush, trying to look tough and friendly at the same time while he explained his administration's bellicose attitude toward Iran to a skeptical audience. Asked at a news conference if the U.S. might attack Iran--even while the European imperialists are negotiating with that country--Bush said, looking straight at the cameras, that such talk was "ridiculous." And then he added hastily that the U.S. didn't rule out any action. Pure double-speak.

There was laughter in the room. Laughter. So much laughter that it was noted in the transcript. Another photo op turned into humiliation for the would-be emperor.

His next stop is Russia, where he is supposed to dress down the Putin administration for its "crackdown on independent businesses and internal dissent." (New York Times, Feb. 23)

Independent businesses? Like the oil company Yukos, which Bush's energy friends thought they had all sewed up? ExxonMobil and ChevronTexaco had made a deal with the richest person in Russia, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, to sell them a huge chunk of that country's oil riches at firesale prices. Now Khodor kovsky is in jail and Yukos has reverted to state ownership.

As much as the U.S. imperialists feel they deserve to control Russia's great resources and industries--after all, they won the Cold War!--they have not overcome the resistance of the Russian people, even after the destruction of the Soviet workers' state. Putin has to remember that if he wants to keep his job.

Nor is the Bush administration likely to get Russia's cooperation in its drive to isolate Iran and tighten its grip on the Middle East.

At bottom, it is not the independent will of rival capitalist politicians that has thrown a monkey wrench into the plans of Washington's neo-cons. It is the pressure they are feeling from below, from the masses--sometimes articulated clearly in political demonstrations, but more often apparent in other ways, from the spread of popular resistance in Iraq to the falling rate of military enlistment and the resistance to social service cuts, especially Social Security, here in the U.S.


This article is copyright under a Creative Commons License.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: [email protected]
Subscribe [email protected]
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php)

Download the
print edition
Download PDF

Requires Acrobat Reader



AT LEFTBOOKS.COM
Haiti: A Slave Revolution

 Haiti: A Slave Revolution

Read online:
BOLSHEVIKS
AND WAR
Lessons for the anti-war movement