The Bush team loses two of its worst public servants [Archives:2006/1005/Opinion]
By: Hassan Al-Haifi
Of course no one is feeling any sadness or regrets over the resignations of Donald Rumsfeld or the annoying John Bolton as secretary of defense and acting U.S. ambassador to the United Nations respectively. One might even say that, in the case of Rumsfeld, it is about time! For the supervisor of the two worst US military escapades, one really could not help but wonder why did it take so long. In looking at the mess that is now Iraq and all the fabulously concocted reasons for this savage war, of which all the antagonists have yet to be fully defined, the observer is inclined to give the citation for the worst defense strategist to Donald Rumsfeld without any competitors. Look at the numbers again, close to a million dead Iraqis (now reaching an average between 120 and 150 per day). Why and for whom? It certainly is not for the interest of the Iraqis, because even the Secretary General of the United Nations Kofi Annan has admitted Iraq is now worse off than it was under Saddam Hussein. In fact, Iraq has become so bad, that even the President of the United States is reluctant to make a stop-over there to presumably show that he is on the ball on Iraq. He holds his meeting with Iraqi Prime Minister Nour Al-Maliki in Jordan, preferring the protection of the famous Arab Legions of Jordan to the bewildered Marines and other U.S. forces in Iraq, who are also kicking in on the mass murder of the helpless civilian population of Iraq. That really shows how much confidence Bush has on the failing expedition that one of the authors, Donald Rumsfeld, helped to engineer. Yet, as the Washington Post said last week, Mr. Bush stubbornly sticks to his corny repertoire that the “mission must be completed.” What puzzles the observer is trying to figure out what that mission is. Is it the total annihilation of the Iraqi people as vengeance for 9/11? The Iraqis had nothing to do with 9/11, as clearly noted by all sensible observers, but the continuing verbose on fighting terror, as far as Iraq is concerned, is at best stale and out of context.
With Bolton, one can only say that the impulsive die-hard pro-Zionist may have overstepped his fragile mandate, which may have brought the axe down on him so abruptly. Just a couple of days back and without any real grounds for such an act, Bolton wanted to make sure that his voice was heard about the Lebanese situation. A domestic affair more than anything, his Zionist inclination could not help but draw Bolton into blaring out to the world that it was Iran and Syria that is masterminding the civil protests in Lebanon. One would think that such uncalled for statements by the U.S. Representative to the U.N. was really stepping out of line, especially at this time, when the U.S. is trying to solicit the help of these two states (originally considered as members of the Axis of Evil by the Bush Administration) to help find a solution to the security quagmire that Iraq has come to be, thanks to the great strategies drawn up by Douglas Feith, Paul Wolfkowitz, John Bolton, good old Condi and the indefatigable Dick Cheney. On the latter one would like to note a blog comment on this site (http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060426_molly_ivins_bush_reclassification/): “IMPEACHMENT OF THE ENTIRE ADMINISTRATION:
Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, Wolfkowitz, Rice.et al. We cannot afford them; they will have absconded with the national treasury by the time they leave.” So perhaps, Condoleezza saw rightly that Bolton's last public comment was unwelcome and out of tune with her efforts, if they are genuinely her efforts. In any case, good riddance. Bolton was causing havoc in the U.N. and nobody there liked him anyway. One would not expect the successor to bring improvement to the U.S. position in the U.N., but at least one should expect more diplomatic flare should be accorded to this important position.
The Arabs and Lebanon: Since reference was made on Lebanon, it is depressing to see Arab leaders (in keeping with their U.S. masters) call for the opposition in Lebanon to call off their protest against a clearly obvious impotent Lebanese Government. Mind you, this is not for the concern these Arab leaders have about the security and safety of Lebanon. Every Arab in the street knows that this superficial concern of our also impotent Arab leadership comes from the fear that their own subjects just might learn a thing or to about real democracy in action!
Hassan Al-Haifi has been a Yemeni political economist and journalist for more than 20 years.
——
[archive-e:1005-v:14-y:2006-d:2006-12-07-p:opinion]
