Science > Philosophy > People's Daily Online: Can anti-war "hurricane" alter the US policy on Iraq?
| Topic: |
Science > Philosophy |
| User: |
"=?utf-8?B?6I+p6Jap?=" |
| Date: |
31 Jan 2007 04:48:41 AM |
| Object: |
People's Daily Online: Can anti-war "hurricane" alter the US policy on Iraq? |
Wise words from the Chinese:
Can anti-war "hurricane" alter the US policy on Iraq?
By People's Daily Online
http://english.people.com.cn/200701/30/eng20070130_346096.html
The anti-war marches and rallies have sustained for over a year in the
United States, and the Iraq policy of the Bush Administration has met
with increasing, intensified pressures. After President George W. Bush
announced his decision to sent 21,500 additional troops to Iraq, a new
round of anti-war "hurricane" has once again swept across Washington
D=2EC., Los Angeles and San Francisco in California and other American
cities. And Bush's supporting rate has hit a new low of 30 percent.
Under these circumstances, can the anti-war "hurricane" alter the US
policy toward Iraq?
On this question, People's Daily (PD) Editor Luo Chunhua has
sconversed with Li Wenyun and Tang Yong, both senior PD resident
reporters stationed in the U.S., and Ni Feng, a noted research follow
of the Institute of American Studies under the Chinese Academy of
Social Sciences. A detailed account of the discussion runs as follows:
Cold winter rains protrude or gives eminent expressions to the resolve
of anti-war marchers
Editor: On Jan. 27, several hundred thousand anti-war marchers held
large-scale rallies and demonstrations in Washington D.C., Los
Angeles, San Francisco and a couple of other cities in the U.S.,
demanding the Bush Administration withdraw troops from Iraq, and what
is the reaction of various walks of life in the U.S.?
Li Wenyun: The January 27 march, which drew some 3,000 people led by a
dozen returnees from the Iraqi battlefield, began at noon outside the
headquarters of the California Democratic Party in downtown Los
Angeles, a specially chosen location, as the anti-war activists wanted
to send the Democratic-controlled U.S Congress a message that those
congressmen have the obligation and duty bound to represent the mass
opinions. Hosting placards with such slogans "Bring the troops home
now" and "the war is not the way out," marchers walked on steadily,
but slowly and quietly in cold winter rains. What is particularly eye-
catching about scene of these marchers is that more than 20 mock
coffins draped in the US national flag carried by some of these
marchers, which symbolize, along with a stretch of crucifixes erected
by anti-war groups at the Santa Monica Beach, the innocent "psyche" of
those who have died at the Iraq battleground afar.
Tang Yong: On January 27, several hundred thousand protestors shouted
"Bring our troops home" and other alike slogans and appealed to their
government to withdraw American troops at rallies in front of Capitol
in Washington D.C. Actress Jane Fonda, a top anti-war start during the
Vietnam War of the late 1960s and the early 1970s, and other top
performing artists were among celebrities to partake the huge anti-war
rally.
Li Wenyun: President Bush said he himself understood the sentiments of
the American people, noting that his new strategy was precisely to end
the Iraq war as soon as possible. In his earlier talks with respect to
his decision on troop increase, he also acknowledged that he knew
Congress would possibly veto his troop increase decision, but he would
keep up his effort and move on as the decision had already been made.
Ni Feng: Shortly after these anti-war activities, Senator Hillary
Rodham Clinton, so far the most popular Democrat candidate for the
2008 Presidential campaign, said it would constitute a very
irresponsible action if Bush shifts his war responsibility onto the
next president to succeed him.
Rallies gear to "A Major Change in Every 4 Years"
Editor: Will the "anti-war hurricane' have an effect to alter the Iraq
policy of the Bush Administration?
Tang Yong: "From a short-term perspective, such demonstrations are
indeed not so useful or helpful," Dr. Huang Jing, a senior research at
the US Brookings Institution was quoted from his telephone-interview
with PD reporters. Under the presidential setup in the US, any policy
set by its president, which is deemed correct, it has to be executed
or implemented on the whole. From a long-term perspective,
nevertheless, noted Dr. Huang, it will have a profound impact on the
US policy on Iraq and the drafting of its whole-set diplomatic policy.
In other words, the anti-war rallies are not oriented to the present,
but to the future, or the near future. In history, the anti-Vietnam
War wave was formidable with its four-year peak period from 1968-71),
but its real political effect turned evidenced in the 1973-post years.
There is a given law guiding the US democratic politics, with a minor
change occurring in every two years (an indication of mid-term
elections ) and a major change for every four years (an implication of
presidential convention). Democrats won the mid-term election last
year and took Congress under its command and the anti-war
demonstrators will make the "stormy sea ever stormier". The 2008
Presidential campaign has already started. If the Iraq issue has
become a negative topic in the presidential debate, the contenders for
the White House, either Democratic or Republican, have to make new
considerations centered this theme.
Ni Feng: The United States has its vital, important strategic
interests on the Iraq issue and the war in Iraq is apparently Bush's
major outward maneuvering during his terms of office. So he will not
negate himself and hastily pull out US troops from Iraq. It is
anticipated that he cannot cope with a mess in Iraq during his tenure,
which very much resembles what Americans did during the Vietnam War.
Rejecting troop withdrawal has 3 major causes
Editor: On the Iraq question, why the Bush administration acts against
the popular will and goes in for troop increase instead of pullout?
Tang Yong: There are three causes involved in this issue. First, the
U=2ES.'"political investment" in the Iraq war is too much or excessive,
the American government cannot stop even if it wishes to. The US
government has input 1.2 trillion US dollars in the war, and more
3,000 US soldiers have lost their lives in Iraq since the war began,
according to the New York Times. Such an immense input has not brought
any rewards so far, and then how can the Bush government reconcile to
its defeat? Second, it has something to do with the personal character
of President Bush, who had openly said in an interview last year that
he would definitely not pull out US troops even if there will be only
Lora Bush, the first lady, and his pet dog to back him up. Thirdly,
there is not much time left for his remaing tenure at the White House,
so he naturally does not care much about the will of the Americans. He
obviously does not give in and admit his defeat.
Demonstrations entails 3 goals
Editor: Since President Bush does not care the feelings of Americans
for the Iraq War, then how you discern the anti-war activities of the
populace in the U.S.?
Ni Feng: President Thomas Jafferson, one of the founding fathers of
the United States, left such a immortal behest: Noting that the most
successful war seldom pays for its losses, he undersoced that "War =C2=A1=
=C2=AD
is as much a punishment to the punisher as to the sufferer." This
teaching of his has still deep-rooted in the hearts of the Americans,
though it has apparently been forgotten by most of those in the US
ruling strata since the early 20th century. The debate originated from
the Iraq issue and the particularly anti-war movement of the American
people has, to a rather great extent, been shifted to inner struggles
within the US administrative setup. For the days ahead, the relevant
debates is expected to be shifted chiefly to the Congress at the helms
of Democrats, and the sustained, popular anti-war activities will add
new weight to the Democrats' game with the Bush Administration.
A healthy force erupted when the United States was bogged down in the
mire of the Vietnam war between the late 1960s and early 1970s and the
raging anti-war drive finally prompted the US government to withdraw
its troops from Vietnam. Likewide, the rise of the anti-war movement
in the U.S. today can be taken at the re-awaking of this healthy force
in the U.S.
Tang Yong: The anti-war marches and rallies can attain three ensuing
objectives: One is to convey an anti-war message to the Washington
policy makers; the second is tantamount to making a show of strength
for the Democrat members of Congress as a heated debate on the Iraq
policy is well under way in Congress, which cannot dispel a possible
shift of the stand by more Republican Congressmen and, the third is to
warn the Bush government not to "cross the line" again on the Iraq
issue. If Bush plays new tricks after his new Iraq policy fails, the
anti-war rallies will certainly have a greater blocking or deterring
role to play.
------------
namaste;
bodhi
http://psychedelictourist.blogspot.com
.
|
|
| User: "theothr1" |
|
| Title: Re: People's Daily Online: Can anti-war "hurricane" alter the US policy on Iraq? |
31 Jan 2007 07:21:13 AM |
|
|
"??" <The_Psychedelic_Tourist@yahoo.com> wrote in
Second, it has something to do with the personal character
of President Bush, who had openly said in an interview last year that
he would definitely not pull out US troops even if there will be only
Lora Bush, the first lady, and his pet dog to back him up. Thirdly,
there is not much time left for his remaing tenure at the White House,
so he naturally does not care much about the will of the Americans. He
obviously does not give in and admit his defeat.
--- -- -
He's resolute and strong.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
