Politics

Bush and Iraq – A Cowboy For Our Times

Learn Politics on mps-politics.com. Bush and Iraq – A Cowboy For Our Times article will help answer your questions on Politics.We at mps-politics.com specialize in Politics. Politics at mps-politics.com provides the most up to date news and articles. If you have questions please do not hesitate to contact us.

Is George W. Bush the smartest person to ever set up shop in the Oval Office? Probably not. Is it true, as it sometimes seems, that he’s just making this stuff up as he goes along? Maybe so. But is it also possible that a cowboy president with more audacity than diplomacy, more bravura than brilliance, is just what we needed at this moment in history?

Iraqi electoral officials confirmed today that Iraqis by an overwhelming majority have adopted a constitution. The constitution formally establishes a democratic government in a nation that endured a reign of terror under Saddam Hussein for almost 30 years, and clears another major hurdle toward a democratic future in Iraq.

Meanwhile, a majority of American citizens continue to disapprove of President Bush’s performance, and his handling of Iraq in particular. A Zogby poll yesterday put the president’s positive rating at 45%. However, future generations will not judge George W. Bush by how he fared in current opinion polls, but by the ultimate result of the democratic experiment in Iraq, which the president unilaterally thrust upon them and us.

Iraq’s constitutional election was held Oct. 15, but the results were not certified until today. The constitution was approved by 79% of Iraqi voters. Fifteen of Iraq’s 18 provinces approved the document by a majority or more. A two-thirds dissenting vote in any three provinces would have defeated the constitution, but there were only two such provinces.

The result apparently comes as a surprise to most Americans, only 34% of whom believed Iraq was even secure enough to stage the election, according to a CBS poll two weeks ago. Similarly, before the Jan. 30 election at which Iraq established its current transitional government, only 28% of Americans believed Iraq was secure enough to vote, and only the same percentage believed it would be a fair election. Despite our pessimism in the U.S. about the chances for democracy in Iraq, both the January and October elections were stunning successes. In last week’s referendum, voter turnout was 63% -- higher than the 60% turnout at the 2004 U.S. presidential election. The Iraq Independent Electoral Commission reported no serious voter fraud, and violence on election day was lower than expected.

Throughout the 20th century, American presidents were forced to keep one eye and one foot in the Middle East, including Jimmy Carter, frustrated by his inability to free hostages held by Iran’s Ayatollah; Ronald Reagan, who struggled and failed to find a policy that worked in war-torn Lebanon; and George H.W. Bush, whose presidency was defined by the Gulf War. In the 21st century, the Middle East remains a briar patch for George W. Bush.

If Iraq prevails in establishing a lasting democracy in the Middle East, it will prove to be one of the most significant events in modern history. It will end Iraq’s role as a thorn in the flesh of the U.S. and Israel, it will elevate Iraq as a model of democracy for other autocratic states, and hopefully, Iraq will become an ally and friend in that troubled region.

According to the same CBS poll, only 50% of U.S. citizens believe a lasting democracy will emerge in Iraq. But American citizens have been wrong so far about Iraq’s prospects for freedom. Next on the agenda is the Dec. 15 election of Iraq’s first constitutional government, at which Iraqi voters are likely to prove us wrong again.

I am not a cheerleader for George W. Bush. I preferred other candidates in 2000 and 2004 (although not Gore or Kerry). Like many Americans, I remain unconvinced of the connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein. I remain unsure that the president had the right strategy, the right timing or the right end game for his invasion of Iraq. And, like many Americans, I wonder whether the president’s team intentionally misled us regarding weapons of mass destruction that just weren’t there.

The best way to express my reservations about President Bush is to say that often it looks like he is just making this stuff up as he goes along. Playing it by ear. Shooting from the hip.

But the fact is that Saddam Hussein is a cruel tyrant who inflicted torture and death on tens of thousands of his own people. The fact is that George W. Bush succeeded in bringing down Saddam’s evil regime. The fact is that despite the unlikelihood of a democratic flower blooming in the Middle East, it is happening before our eyes. The fact is that the Iraqi people are free, at least much freer than they ever thought possible a couple of years ago, and they have successfully conducted democratic elections, not once, but twice.

None of it may have happened under the leadership of a smarter or more diplomatic or more careful president. It is happening under the leadership of George W. Bush. If Iraq’s experiment in freedom continues to succeed, George W. Bush’s presidency may eventually be ranked among the most important of modern presidents. Maybe George W. Bush is just the right cowboy for our times.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The House of Representatives voted to give President Barack Obama a limited line-item veto authority on Wednesday in a rare display of bipartisanship on bitterly divisive spending and budget issues.

More Articles: