Hans Rustad Abu Ghraib er bare et symptom. Bush-administrasjonen vil bli innhentet av svakhetene ved sin politikk, og de er store og alvorlige, skriver Fareed Zakaria i Newsweek:
George W. Bush’s legacy is now clear: the creation of a poisonous atmosphere of anti-Americanism around the globe.
Han peker på at en håndfull på toppen av administrasjonen har styrt ikke bare forsvars- og sikkerhetspolitikken, men også utenrikspolitikken: Cheney og Rumsfeld, med Wolfowitz og Perle under seg. Powell er blitt overkjørt. Rice står et sted imellom.
Det er en dristig analyse, men trolig tar den bare en erkjennelse på forskudd, som ellers er rett rundt hjørnet: Det er ikke bare Rumsfeld dette handler om, men en måte å drive politikk på som har vært Bushs foretrukne. Det er disse mennene han har lyttet til.
Since 9/11, a handful of officials at the top of the Defense Department and the vice president’s office have commandeered American foreign and defense policy. In the name of fighting terror they have systematically weakened the traditional restraints that have made this country respected around the world. Alliances, international institutions, norms and ethical conventions have all been deemed expensive indulgences at a time of crisis.
Zakaria sier de sørget for å skaffe seg maksimalt handlingsrom. Geneve-konvensjonene passet ikke til den nye situasjonen. Det er noe av forklaringen på Abu Ghraib.
Within weeks after September 11, senior officials at the Pentagon and the White House began the drive to maximize American freedom of action. They attacked specifically the Geneva Conventions, which govern behavior during wartime. Donald Rumsfeld explained that the conventions did not apply to today’s «set of facts.» He and his top aides have tried persistently to keep prisoners out of the reach of either American courts or international law, presumably so that they can be handled without those pettifogging rules as barriers. Rumsfeld initially fought both the uniformed military and Colin Powell, who urged that prisoners in Guantanamo be accorded rights under the conventions. Eventually he gave in on the matter but continued to suggest that the protocols were antiquated. Last week he said again that the Geneva Conventions did not «precisely apply» and were simply basic rules.
Det var grunner til å reservere seg, men Cheney og Rumsfeld har gått for langt, og må nå betale prisen. Akkurat som det ikke går an å diskutere med suksess, går det heller ikke an å forhandle om nederlag. Det har sitt eget momentum, og lærer man ikke blir det dyrt.
The basic attitude taken by Rumsfeld, Cheney and their top aides has been «We’re at war; all these niceties will have to wait.» As a result, we have waged pre-emptive war unilaterally, spurned international cooperation, rejected United Nations participation, humiliated allies, discounted the need for local support in Iraq and incurred massive costs in blood and treasure. If the world is not to be trusted in these dangerous times, key agencies of the American government, like the State Department, are to be trusted even less. Congress is barely informed, even on issues on which its «advise and consent» are constitutionally mandated.
Zakaria feller en knusende dom, og er inne på noe av det samme som NYTimes: At skepsisen til Bush har nedslag langt utenfor liberale og venstreorienterte kretser:
This strange combination of arrogance and incompetence has not only destroyed the hopes for a new Iraq. It has had the much broader effect of turning the United States into an international outlaw in the eyes of much of the world.
