David Johnson: Subject to change

Star Newspapers

On Thursday night President Bush and Republican presidential candidates Rudolph Giuliani and John McCain asked the American people to set aside their sense of history and common sense. The three Republicans asked the American people to buy into their spin of the facts surrounding the invasion and the current status of the occupation of Iraq.

Americans were asked to forget the president's claim that Iraq was involved in the Sept. 11 attack on this country, that he said he had a plan for Iraq and that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. None of those assertions were true.

Prior to the president's Thursday night speech, the Republican spin machine was busy trying to create a diversionary issue around an ad sponsored by MoveOn, a progressive grassroots organization that challenged the credibility of Gen. David George Petraeus with the slogan, "Petraeus or betray us."

Gen. Petraeus' superior, Adm. William Fallon, chief of the Central Command, is cited in the Asian Times as having derided Petraeus as a sycophant during their first meeting in Baghdad in March. Fallon reportedly told Petraeus that he considered him to be "an ass-kissing little chicken s--t" and added, "I hate people like that." Comments like this indicate a split within the ranks of the military on the effectiveness of the occupation.

When one considers the editing of reports on global warming by this administration, the politicization of the U.S. attorneys in several states and the reason given for going to war, the MoveOn ad raises a valid question. This administration has been one of the most secretive and misleading in modern history.

In addition, the president implied that the United States should prepare for a long-term commitment to Iraq similar to that made in Korea and Berlin. This part of Mr. Bush's speech is bound to further stir up the hornet's nest that is the Middle East.

Keep in mind this administration destroyed any pretense of being an honest broker in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by refusing pull in the reins on Israel since the start of the Bush presidency. Bush's apparent uncritical support of Israel rankled Saudi Arabia, the administration's biggest ally in the region, an indication that Team Bush had gone too far in its failure to be critical of Israel.

Stating that American troops may reside in the region for the next 50 years won't win more friends in that region of the world. Russia may even have a few things to stay about that.

Such a policy agenda for the region could very well lead to increased regional tensions with the possibility of tensions spreading into Asia.

The Democrats find themselves in an awkward position, as they don't have the votes to unilaterally end the American occupation.

Democratic strategists ought to be putting pressure on moderate Republicans and those in the Republican Party who are up for re-election next year.

Democrats ought to be able to stake out a position that takes into consideration the failed policies of the Bush administration and where they will take the country over the remainder of Bush's term. This will enable the Democrats to win enough seats to emerge from the elections with control of Congress.

With more power and influence in Congress and control of the White House, Democrats can begin to craft a foreign policy that represents a balanced approach to the Middle East. Such a policy would begin to end the isolation of the United States from the international community and go a long way to ending tensions in the region.

In order to accomplish such a feat, American public opinion will have to dramatically shift away from the Republican Party. This will not be easy given the poor performance of the media in monitoring this administration and its ties to the military-industrial-oil complex.

Nonetheless, this is what must be done. There is no quick fix to Iraq. The current ethnic infighting was fueled by British colonialism and exacerbated by a short-sighted and hegemonic American agenda going back to the end of World War II.

For those Americans looking for a meaningful solution in the Middle East, there must be recognition that the American public must be free from the ideological control of a corporate-dominated media. Otherwise Americans will not be able to see how U.S. foreign policy has contributed to a loss of respect in the world.

The president's Thursday night speech is a perfect example of a government unwilling to tell its people the truth, let alone listen to them.

David Johnson's "Subject to Change" appears every other week in The Star. Johnson is a professor at South Suburban College in South Holland and a former mayor of Harvey. He may be reached at djohnson@southsuburbancollege.edu.