Like father -- like son? Bush(43)'s stock falls after Iraq...
By Mark Alexander · Friday, July 11, 2003
President George W. Bush is on a five-nation tour of Africa, shoring up our scattered alliances on that continent. Some of Africa's failed nation states are hosting Jihadi terrorists now on the run from Afghanistan, Iraq, and other locales made inhospitable by the presence of American forces and indigenous reformed governments. Most notably, U.S. Special Forces and the CIA have been conducting "hunt and kill" operations for al-Qa'ida operatives in Kenya since mid-May. The Bush administration hopes the President's trip will help solidify support for those operations.
In Iraq, further independence and a new constitution are taking shape. In the shadow of our Independence Day anniversary celebration just passed, The Federalist is encouraged by the proactive role of Iraqis in the determination of their nation’s future, and we again stress that the Arab and Muslim worlds must be allowed to develop their own unique brand of democratic republics to match the needs of their culture. We believe that Iraq’s religious and emerging secular leaders can work cooperatively with the U.S. interim authority to effect this end.
But our swift military success in Iraq apparently left some of Saddam Hussein's Ba'athist sympathizers and other Jihadis undetected. Allied troops have thus been launching raids across Iraq, sweeping up suspected Saddamite remnants and their weapons, in response to an increasing tempo of attacks.
Coalition forces have been racking up cards from the Iraqi Most Wanted "Deck of Death," but after analyzing recent voice broadcasts claimed to be Saddam Hussein, the U.S. has placed heavy rewards on the heads of the deck's top trio -- $25 million for Saddam, and $15 million for his sons Uday and Qusay.
One recent prize was the arrest of Iraqi diplomat and spy Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim Samir Al-Ani, reported by Czech intelligence officials to have met with 9-11 terrorist linchpin Mohammed Atta in Prague in early 2001. We have some remaining questions to suggest as leads for the interrogators and investigators. What did Al-Ani carry or receive by diplomatic pouch in the Czech Republic? What has come of the investigation into that Florida physician's statement that Atta and another of the 9-11 terrorist crew received treatment for anthrax infections?
The Pentagon announced last week that two divisions of international troops -- one from the UK and the other from Poland -- will move in to relieve nearly 150,000 U.S. troops by the end of the month. A possible third peacekeeping division may arrive from India, and at least five or six other countries are expected to contribute to the divisions, primarily our allies from New Europe.
The Federalist endorses the idea of a broader peacekeeping force in postwar Iraq on the condition that interim administrative authority remain solely in U.S. and British hands. Furthermore, we reiterate the belief that such missions as this -- focused upon security for democracy -- should become a function of NATO in its post-Cold War role.
In other news...
Tasting blood in the political waters back home, Democrats are accusing President Bush of lying to the American public about the WMD threat posed by Iraq. Indeed, given the nature of intelligence estimates in light of hindsight, some of the analysis cited by the President as justification for Operation Iraqi Freedom -- specifically that Iraq was seeking fissionable nuclear material from an African nation -- was inaccurate. No sooner had Leftists levied those charges than the CIA acknowledged the discovery, in May, of gas-centrifuge components used to enrich weapons-grade uranium, as well as documents pertaining to Iraq’s intentions to reconstitute its nuclear-weapons program. The information and components were provided by Iraqi scientist Mahdi Shukur Obeidi, who had burried the hardware in his back yard -- which sheds some light on the difficulty in uncovering evidence of Saddam's WMD programs.
Federalist readers will recall that last October we reported that "North Korea was enriching uranium using gas centrifuge technology ... and that, according to our intelligence sources, gas centrifuge technology was the centerpiece of Saddam's nuclear WMD program."
News from the Swamp...
In the Executive Branch, like Bush(41), Bush(43) mostly gets it right when it comes to U.S. national security and foreign policy. Last week, the President withdrew almost $50 million in military aid to 35 countries for failure to sign agreements with the U.S. to protect American citizens from prosecution by the International Criminal Court, as mandated by the 2002 American Service Members Protection Act. The Bush administration had previously withdrawn the U.S. signature to the ICC treaty -- a patently extra-constitutional agreement signed by Bill Clinton in the eleventh hour, as he was leaving office. Under the ICC, U.S. leaders and servicemen abroad could be charged with so-called "war crimes" and be arrested and prosecuted under the treaty’s terms -- including such figures as Henry Kissinger for his role in the Vietnam War. The amount of military aid withheld is expected to soar in 2004, though NATO allies and what the White House calls "major non-NATO allies" critical to U.S. national security are exempt from the loss of military aid. The U.S. presently provides military assistance to 134 countries around the globe.
Notably, however, like Bush(41), Bush(43) mostly gets it wrong when it comes to most domestic policies. That was readily apparent this week as Medicare "reform" was working its way to the President's desk for his promised signature.
It is not enough to continue rationalizing the Bush administration's decidedly Left-of-Center domestic-policy positions as being necessitated by pragmatic political calculations. In his campaign for the presidency, then-Gov. Bush articulated clearly his intent to appoint "constitutional constructionists" to the federal judiciary, and he has not wavered in that determination. But what the nation needs now is a constitutional constructionist in the executive branch -- one who will uphold his oath to "defend the Constitution" and be its most vocal advocate on issues like spending cuts and containment, if not elimination, of unconstitutional domestic social programs.
Instead, President Bush has renewed or expanded many such programs and has taken the art of deficit spending to new highs. To his credit, he has passed some minor tax reductions in the last three years, but he has offered no corresponding reductions in central-government spending, which has grown by more than $500 billion in three years and faster now than at any time since LBJ launched his infamous Great Society welfare state.
Mr. Bush, at the urging of his political handlers, has flip-flopped on discretionary spending issues like agriculture subsidies, road projects, extension of unemployment insurance, federalization of tens of thousands of airport security personnel, and a $10-billion tax refund for those not paying income taxes. Indeed, he has even joined the likes of Teddy Kennedy to greatly expand the budget and influence of the Department of Education.
Now, he is proposing an enormous nondiscretionary-budget expansion of the bankrupt Medicare program, prompting Republican Senator Orrin Hatch to declare, "If you love the federal government and the federal government's control over all of our lives, boy, this is the program for you!"
Of this unconstitutional folly, economist Bruce Bartlett notes: "Conservatives in Congress are appalled by White House demands that they hold their noses and vote for the biggest expansion of government in 30 years. What is the point, they ask, of having control of the White House and Congress if it is just to enact Democrat big-spending programs? Better to be back in the minority, many say. ... In short, the political calculation is penny-wise/pound-foolish in the extreme. Any prescription drug plan will be an albatross around the Republican Party's neck for generations to come. It's a bad deal."
In confirmation, Ms. Nancy-Ann DeParle, the Clinton Regime's Medicare administrator, said this week, "Democrats should do everything they can to whisk this bill to ... [President Bush's] desk. In signing it, as he will surely be forced to do, he will preside over the biggest expansion of government health benefits since the Great Society."
And Team Bush is wondering why their boss's domestic polls are slipping. Moreover, Bush(43) is at some risk of getting "Saddamized" just like Bush(41), who rode his high polls at the end of the Gulf War right into election defeat.
One only wonders if Mr. Bush's next domestic-policy compromise will be in his oft-stated priority to partially privatize Social Security -- before it is bankrupt. We sincerely hope not.