The new year brought a whisper of good news. In the first week of January, Sudanese rebels and the Khartoum government signed a pact ending one of Africa’s longest wars. Since 1983, more than two million people have died, and another four million have fled their homes in fighting that pitched North against South.
As the U.S. occupation of Iraq heads toward its third year, there is a remarkable absence of debate over withdrawal, despite the evidence that a clear majority of the American people want out. Many conservatives are uneasy about the occupation but they are unwilling to challenge the administration publicly. Most liberals in politics and the media appear to believe that invading Iraq was a major blunder, but that withdrawal anytime in the foreseeable future would lead to civil war and chaos.
Jubilant over President George W. Bush maintaining his position for another four years, neoconservatives who played a leading role in shaping the radical trajectory of U.S. foreign policy after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks appear increasingly divided on key issues and uncertain of their position in BushÂs second term.
President Bush’s second inaugural address has received widespread praise for its recognition of the imperative of advancing human freedom worldwide, not just for its own sake, but for America’s own national interest.
Admittedly, it doesn’t have that certain “oomph” of Humphrey Bogart’s line from “ Casablanca ”–probably because “George” is effectively two sounds (Ge-orge) whereas Bogie’s “Sam” is short and punchy.
When President George W. Bush sends his budget to Congress on or about February 7, look for Âguns vs. butter to make a comeback. Debating the surging defense budget and its effect on domestic spending went out of fashion after 9-11 with all that talk about Homeland Security.
The U.S. government and most pundits have painted IraqÂs recent elections as a great victory over the Iraqi insurgents, who opposed them, and as a vindication of the Bush administrationÂs policy of bringing democracy to the Middle East. Amid the orgy of self-congratulation over the bravery of Iraqi voters, officials and commentators have ignored the most important story of the election results: a Sunni electoral boycott that demonstrates a level of support for the insurgency in the Sunni triangle that is far greater than what the administration has admitted.
While the U.S., India, and Great Britain have sharply condemned the Feb. 1 coup by King Gyanendra Bir Bikram Shah of Nepal, the policies of those three governments vis-à-vis the ongoing civil war in the Himalayan nation must share considerable blame for the present crisis. Declaring a state of emergency, the King placed the leaders of Nepal’s political parties, as well as Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, under house arrest. Gyanendra also suspended constitutional rights to freedom of speech, assembly, and a free press, and authorized preventive detention.