"I'm a uniter, not a divider," said George
W. Bush during his presidential campaign. He got
that one right. He has managed to unite the whole
world against him and the war he proposes to
wage against Iraq.
From New York to Johannesburg, millions
of people hit the streets last weekend in the largest collection of anti-war demonstrations since the Vietnam War. The biggest, record-breaking protests were in the countries whose governments have allied themselves with Bush: Rome (one to three million) and London (750,000 to one million).
So much for the "coalition of the willing"
that Bush has promised to lead to war if the UN
Security Council won't back him. The people who
live under the NATO governments that are
backing Bush, according to European polls, are
overwhelmingly against a war without UN
approval: Britain (90 percent), Italy (73 percent),
Spain (90 percent), and Turkey (94 percent).
Even in the "new Europe" of the East,
whose cash-poor governments have wasted
billions on weaponry so they could join NATO
and curry favor with Washington, large majorities
are against the war. The truth is that if the world
were made up of real democracies, Bush wouldn't
have one single country on his side.
But he still doesn't get it. Alternating
between the roles of the spoiled rich kid who buys
his friends and the belligerence of the
neighborhood bully, he has been slow to learn that
neither Washington's money nor all of the
Pentagon's advanced weaponry can win friendship
or respect among the people of the world.
Mr. Bush is doing somewhat better on the
home front, where polls have found majorities
favoring "military action." This is the result of a
media that repeats his arguments endlessly and
only occasionally provides rebuttal, as well as
utter spinelessness among the leadership of the
opposition party. That leaves most Americans in
the position of a jury that has heard only one side
of the case.
In the latest New York Times/CBS News
poll, 42 percent of those polled believed that
Saddam Hussein was involved in the September
11 attacks. Not even the Administration has
floated this allegation. This indicates the profound
level of ignorance on which Bush's support is
based. The headline for that story should have
read: "Many Americans Misinformed About Iraq
War -- The Rest Are Opposed."
Yet even in the United States, 59 percent
think the U.S. should "wait and give the U.N. and
weapons inspectors more time." And 54 percent
would oppose a war if "thousands of Iraqi
civilians were killed," which is extremely likely.
When the UN Security Council stood up to
Secretary of State Colin Powell last week, the US
stock market soared in response. Why? Because
Wall Street knows that this war is very likely to
hurt the economy. Unlike previous wars (World
War II, Korea, Vietnam) that boosted economic
growth, this one will almost certainly have the
opposite effect. It will provide little stimulus to
domestic production, while the uncertainty it
brings will cause businesses to hold back on
investment. And of course any further oil price
increases will deliver another blow to the
economy.
But the war will provide a distraction, and
Mr. Bush seems to have concluded that he needs
this more than anything. We've had a jobless
recovery from the last recession and the next one
is already on the horizon. The federal budget --
with help from Bush's tax cuts for the rich -- is
headed for a decade or more of growing deficits.
What would these people have to show for
themselves without a war?
The White House claims it is defying the
world on our behalf, to save Americans from the
threat of another September 11 or worse. But
nothing could be further from the truth. A "pre-
emptive" war will drastically increase the chances
of international terrorist actions directed at the
attackers -- that is one of the reasons why Europe
is so opposed.
Americans are increasingly coming to
realize this too, and President Bush's approval
ratings -- including those relating to his handling
of foreign policy -- have been steadily dropping.
As the saying goes, regime change begins at
home.
Mark Weisbrot is Co-Director of the Center for
Economic and Policy Research, in Washington
D.C. (www.cepr.net)
###