NEWSPAPER COLUMNS
 ¶ Most Recent
¶ Miscellany
|
COMMENTARY
January 22, 2005
The re-inauguration
Peggy Noonan -- the contemporary newspaper columnist from whom I have learned most over the years -- gave President Bush's second inaugural speech thumbs down late Thursday night. ("It left me with a bad feeling and reluctant dislike.") This was widely noticed for she is quite favourably disposed to Mr. Bush and even took a leave of absence to help him during the recent presidential campaign. She found the protestations about liberty began to sing with "mission inebriation". In particular she found the concluding line Renewed in our strength -- tested, but not weary -- we are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom, simply over the top. William Safire who has made himself a kind of authority on great political speeches rated it among the top five second-inaugurals (from a field of 20). He thought it was gutsy and congratulated the President for standing up to the doubters -- while himself characteristically nitpicking a couple of weak points. The reader will guess I am fairly partial to Bush -- one of very few politicians I have genuinely admired in the course of my adult life -- but after reading this major speech I was not for the first time leaning Noonan. It would be hard to write a speech better calculated to irritate the world outside the United States; though doing that is almost irresistible. At the moment especially on the balance of current events the "rest of the world" has earned a fairly solid American kick in the afterquarters. But the question is has the Bush administration begun to close in on itself -- to become self-referential and increasingly isolated from realities in that outside world. That was the strongest suit in John Kerry's opposition during the election -- the point that made moderate people worry; and it is the standard pitfall for any president's second term. While it may seem strange for an administration that has been lampooned for a "shortage of empty gestures" to be criticized for excess talk this is the criticism I fear may be valid. It is something that has bothered me before. In the long lead-up to the invasion of Iraq President Bush was beginning to lose me with what sounded like gratuitous threats. My thought was Don't even talk about it until you're ready, and then don't give your adversary a lot of time to respond. This was more a military than a rhetorical consideration. I rate surprise very highly as a military tactic and I was appalled to discern Saddam Hussein preparing for such a long-telegraphed punch. The results have partly been harvested in Fallujah and elsewhere in the Sunni Triangle. Given the larger situation I thought that it was actually more prudent to attack sooner with fewer resources though I could see the logistical nightmare that would follow. The priority was to knock the evil regime flat not only before it could set the kinds of traps American soldiers later had to walk into but before world opinion could be organized as Saddam's principal line of defence. But that is history now. A week from today no doubt amid terrorist horrors Iraq will vote; and its future looks different from its past. We have moved on to new issues and potentially new military confrontations. The evil regimes in Iran and Syria are the new foreground targets with the whole region again waiting to discover if the U.S. means what it says. The arguments for chastening regimes in those countries -- this time perhaps with more assistance from their peoples -- I have no space to rehearse today. Suffice to say both regimes are by sponsoring "insurgency" in Iraq behaving on the theory that U.S. and democratic interests there may be sabotaged with impunity. The ayatollahs further appear to believe that no deadly threat stands between themselves and the acquisition of nuclear weapons and long-range missile delivery systems. They cannot be allowed to think this much longer. The world is the world. It recovers quickly from violent shocks (history is full of them); it dwells enchanted over proliferations of words. Action anyway speaks louder. If I had a single piece of unwelcome foreign advice to offer the Bush administration in its second term it would be: speak more softly and carry a bigger stick. David Warren
© Ottawa Citizen
|
Top