Context - One of the

Context - One of the most common complaints coming from the (usually) left is that Bush has blown our relations with the rest of the world, squandering the goodwill we received after 9/11.

Mark Schmidt - writing in a completely different discussion group in an email used by permission here - responded to the oft-heard notion that "we'll win the war, but we've already lost the peace".

Catchy. But Bush was very, very unpopular in many parts of the world before Sept 11. And American policy in general was not popular, and much of this was due to Clinton's era also (and from just being America in general). Could Sept 11 have changed this for very long? I don't think so. The way Bush presents himself and policies doesn't help. But don't say we've squandered support that we never really had. We just had sympathy.

This is an excellent point. The US has sent billions of dollars in humanitarian aid to countries that hate us, due to the sympathy we feel for the victims as people; I'd suspect that if a tornado churned up half of Paris tomorrow, we'd have planes full of relief supplies the way shortly, however most of us feel about the French goverment's stances.

We probably lost some of the sympathy in places more quickly than we could have if we had a president with any talent for making solemn faces, but most countries aren't going to send their soldiers someplace to die next to ours just because of sympathy.

Remember also that plenty of people around the world were protesting and calling America names before the US even moved into Afghanisan. Others who weren't protesting the act itself were complaining about the proposed methods or the timeline for action. The effort there is not yet done by any means, in fact it just started and still needs our focus, but there is little doubt now about the validity of the action or the cause itself.

Bush is frustrating because he can't express his opinion in a convincing way and rarely in a comprehensible way, and he seems relunctant to send his administration out to perform this task. They appear to behave arrogantly even when they try to state their case, but this doesn't mean the cause is wrong or that most people wouldn't protest anyway. Look at the UK. Blair and his foriegn secratary Jack Straw have made some of the most moving and compelling speeches I've ever seen regarding military action in Iraq, and it makes little difference on public opinion even inside the UK let alone outside.

So while Bush needs to get better or get better people around him, the real question comes down to: how should America have better used this sympathy? The war on terror? That seems to be marching along. The Middle East crisis? Would Isreali or Palestinian sympathy have made them comprimise on anything?

Very true. Sympathy is cheap. Support separates the wheat from the chaff.

Bush needs to make a better show of things, and try a few minutes of that humility he mentioned so long ago. But in the end actions have to be taken and some aren't going to be popular. Bush doesn't help things, but even Clinton's "serious but caring" face and Reagan's speechwriters wouldn't have the security council giving us a foot massage this time.

Posted by Mitch at March 10, 2003 06:51 PM