|
Bush's backing of Rumsfeld shocks and angers Arabs
(Agencies)
Updated: 2004-05-11 08:35 Arab commentators reacted with shock and disbelief
on Monday over U.S. President Bush's robust backing of Defense Secretary Donald
Rumsfeld against calls for his resignation.
U.S. Secretary of
Defense Donald Rumsfeld escorts President George W. Bush from the
Pentagon after Bush received a briefing May 10, 2004. Arab
commentators reacted with shock and disbelief over Bush's robust backing
of Rumsfeld against calls for his resignation.
[Reuters] | Critics had called for him to quit
after the furor over the abuse of Iraqi prisoners but analysts, editors and
ordinary Arabs were united in their condemnation of Bush who said the United
States owed Rumsfeld a "debt of gratitude."
"After the torture and vile acts by the American army, President Bush goes
out and congratulates Rumsfeld. It's just incredible. I am in total shock," said
Omar Belhouchet, editor of the influential Algerian national daily El Watan.
"Bush's praise for Rumsfeld will discredit the United States...and further
damage its reputation, which is already at a historic low in the Arab world," he
added.
Analysts have said the damage from images seen worldwide of U.S. soldiers
abusing naked Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib prison would be indelible,
incalculable and a gift to al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
What people saw, they said, was the true image of the occupation: humiliation
of an occupied people, contempt for Islam, sadism and racism.
"After Mr. Bush's decision to keep Rumsfeld, all their apologies seem like
lip service," Dubai-based political analyst Jawad al-Anani told Reuters. "Mr.
Rumsfeld would have certainly lost his job if the prisoners were American."
"The United States is spending so much money by setting up Alhurra television
and Radio Sawa to improve its image in the Arab world...How can it reconcile
that with keeping a man who has insulted every Arab through the abuses of Iraqi
prisoners," added Anani, a former Jordanian foreign minister.
University of Algiers professor Mahmoud Belhimeur agreed.
"I cannot believe the United States reacts the way an authoritarian regimes
would. Bush should have done the honorable thing and fired Rumsfeld," he said.
RUMSFELD "SYMBOL" OF IRAQ WAR
But Michael Cox, professor of international relations at the London School of
Economics, said the repercussions of firing the defense secretary would have
been very significant for Bush.
Iraqi men sit
outside the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, May 10, 2004, awaiting
information about detained relatives.
[Reuters] | "This has been Rumsfeld's war, and I suppose the political symbolism of
trying to get rid of Rumsfeld would be huge."
Cox said he could not entirely rule out that Rumsfeld could go, if U.S.
public opinion turned. But he added it would seem out of character for Rumsfeld
to go quietly.
"'I want to spend more time with my family' doesn't sound too credible with
Mr. Rumsfeld. With Mr. Powell maybe, but not Rumsfeld," he said.
A Saudi businessman, who asked not to be named, said keeping Rusmfeld would
be seen as Washington's quiet approval of the abuse.
"This just confirms that what is happening in Iraq in general, and
especially what is happening in Abu Ghraib is sanctioned by the American
administration and that is a hell of a position to be in.
"I see no advantage in keeping Rumsfeld. Bush should be building bridges with
the outside world."
Mustapha Ramid, a prominent Moroccan opposition member of parliament said:
"It's normal for Bush to back Rumsfeld. The contrary would have been a real
surprise. This shows that Bush takes responsibility for what's happening in
Iraq."
| |
 |
|
|
|
|
Today's
Top News |
|
|
|
Top World
News |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
