Англофил (valchess) wrote,

Цитатник Англофила - 34: Джордж Буш в исторической перспективе

За американскими президентскими выборами в Альбионе по традиции следят с большим интересом. 4 года назад я на эту тему высказался ("Британия наблюдает за американскими выборами"). Ничего принципиально не изменилось - разве что в этот раз, по понятным причинам, интерес был еще больше. В моей цитатной рубрике я, пожалуй, отдам дань не новому (у него все впереди), а прошлому президенту - все-таки восемь весьма насыщенных событиями лет он возглавлял самую мощную державу, и уже поэтому так или иначе останется в истории. Отношение к нему в основном понятно какое, и местные газеты не жалеют иронических эпитетов, прощаясь с ним. Что ж, тем интереснее зафиксировать здесь позитивный взгляд на деятельность "Егора Егоровича".

На минувшей неделе Daily Telegraph, которая по причине своей консервативной ориентации была к Бушу наиболее снисходительна, опубликовала статью одного из ведущих британских историков (который известен широкой публике по обе стороны океана и по многочисленным газетным публикациям, и по телевизионным выступлениям и фильмам) Эндрю Робертса (Andrew Roberts), в которой тот как раз и утверждает, что история Джорджа Буша оправдает. И объясняет, почему. Эта статья под названием "История покажет, что Джордж Буш был прав" и помещена ниже. Но сначала приведу взятые из того же номера две заметки, в которых дань перечень 10 лучших и 20 худших "моментов", случившихся за время президентсва Буша. В газете каждый "момент" откомментирован - желающие могут пройти по приведенным ссылкам. Кстати, и статью Робертса читатели Telegraph обсуждают с большим пылом - там уже многие сотни комментов.

George W Bush's 10 Best Moments

By Nick Greene

1) US aid to Africa
2) Immediate response to 9/11
3) No Child Left Behind
4) Marine life protection
5) Military surge in Iraq
6) Removing the Taliban from power
7) No major terrorist attacks in America since 9/11
8) Restraint with Iran and North Korea
9) Moderate immigration policies
10) Medicare Prescription drug benefits for seniors

George Bush's 20 worst moments

By Nick Greene

1) No WMDs
2) "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job"
3) No Post-War Plan for Iraq
4) Permitting Torture
5) Ignoring Pre-9/11 Terror Memo
6) "Mission Accomplished"
7) Entering Iraq without a UN mandate
8) Insisting there was a link between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda
9) Failing to capture Osama bin Laden
10) Abandoning the Kyoto Protocol
11) Refusing to let Katrina ruin his holiday
12) Underestimating the cost of the war
13) Lack of body armour for US troops
14) Failure to include Louisiana's coastal parishes in state of emergency plan
15) Tax cuts for the wealthy
16) Losing focus on Afghanistan
17) Limiting stem cell research
18) Appointment and backing of Alberto Gonzales
19) Awarding lucrative Iraq reconstruction contracts to Halliburton
20) Warrantless Wiretapping

History will show that George W Bush was right

by Andrew Roberts

The American lady who called to see if I would appear on her radio programme was specific. "We're setting up a debate," she said sweetly, "and we want to know from your perspective as a historian whether George W Bush was the worst president of the 20th century, or might he be the worst president in American history?"

"I think he's a good president," I told her, which seemed to dumbfound her, and wreck my chances of appearing on her show.

In the avalanche of abuse and ridicule that we are witnessing in the media assessments of President Bush's legacy, there are factors that need to be borne in mind if we are to come to a judgment that is not warped by the kind of partisan hysteria that has characterised this issue on both sides of the Atlantic.

The first is that history, by looking at the key facts rather than being distracted by the loud ambient noise of the 24-hour news cycle, will probably hand down a far more positive judgment on Mr Bush's presidency than the immediate, knee-jerk loathing of the American and European elites.

At the time of 9/11, which will forever rightly be regarded as the defining moment of the presidency, history will look in vain for anyone predicting that the Americans murdered that day would be the very last ones to die at the hands of Islamic fundamentalist terrorists in the US from that day to this.

The decisions taken by Mr Bush in the immediate aftermath of that ghastly moment will be pored over by historians for the rest of our lifetimes. One thing they will doubtless conclude is that the measures he took to lock down America's borders, scrutinise travellers to and from the United States, eavesdrop upon terrorist suspects, work closely with international intelligence agencies and take the war to the enemy has foiled dozens, perhaps scores of would-be murderous attacks on America. There are Americans alive today who would not be if it had not been for the passing of the Patriot Act. There are 3,000 people who would have died in the August 2005 airline conspiracy if it had not been for the superb inter-agency co-operation demanded by Bush
after 9/11.

The next factor that will be seen in its proper historical context in years to come will be the true reasons for invading Afghanistan in October 2001 and Iraq in April 2003. The conspiracy theories believed by many (generally, but not always) stupid people – that it was "all about oil", or the securing of contracts for the US-based Halliburton corporation, etc – will slip into the obscurity from which they should never have emerged had it not been for comedian-filmmakers such as Michael Moore.

Instead, the obvious fact that there was a good case for invading Iraq based on 14 spurned UN resolutions, massive human rights abuses and unfinished business following the interrupted invasion of 1991 will be recalled.

Similarly, the cold light of history will absolve Bush of the worst conspiracy-theory accusation: that he knew there were no WMDs in Iraq. History will show that, in common with the rest of his administration, the British Government, Saddam's own generals, the French, Chinese, Israeli and Russian intelligence agencies, and of course SIS and the CIA, everyone assumed that a murderous dictator does not voluntarily destroy the WMD arsenal he has used against his own people. And if he does, he does not then expel the UN weapons inspectorate looking for proof of it, as he did in 1998 and again in 2001.

Mr Bush assumed that the Coalition forces would find mass graves, torture chambers, evidence for the gross abuse of the UN's food-for-oil programme, but also WMDs. He was right about each but the last, and history will place him in the mainstream of Western, Eastern and Arab thinking on the matter.

History will probably, assuming it is researched and written objectively, congratulate Mr Bush on the fact that whereas in 2000 Libya was an active and vicious member of what he was accurately to describe as an "axis of evil" of rogue states willing to employ terrorism to gain its ends, four years later Colonel Gaddafi's WMD programme was sitting behind glass in a museum in Oakridge, Tennessee.

With his characteristic openness and at times almost self-defeating honesty, Mr Bush has been the first to acknowledge his mistakes – for example, tardiness over Hurricane Katrina – but there are some he made not because he was a ranting Right-winger, but because he was too keen to win bipartisan support. The invasion of Iraq should probably have taken place months earlier, but was held up by the attempt to find support from UN security council members, such as Jacques Chirac's France, that had ties to Iraq and hostility towards the Anglo-Americans.

History will also take Mr Bush's verbal fumbling into account, reminding us that Ronald Reagan also mis-spoke regularly, but was still a fine president. The first MBA president, who had a higher grade-point average at Yale than John Kerry, Mr Bush's supposed lack of intellect will be seen to be a myth once the papers in his Presidential Library in the Southern Methodist University in Dallas are available.

Films such as Oliver Stone's W, which portray him as a spitting, oafish frat boy who eats with his mouth open and is rude to servants, will be revealed by the diaries and correspondence of those around him to be absurd travesties, of this charming, interesting, beautifully mannered history buff who, were he not the most powerful man in the world, would be a fine person to have as a pal.

Instead of Al Franken, history will listen to Bob Geldof praising Mr Bush's efforts over Aids and malaria in Africa; or to Manmohan Singh, the prime minister of India, who told him last week: "The people of India deeply love you." And certainly to the women of Afghanistan thanking him for saving them from Taliban abuse, degradation and tyranny.

When Abu Ghraib is mentioned, history will remind us that it was the Bush Administration that imprisoned those responsible for the horrors. When water-boarding is brought up, we will see that it was only used on three suspects, one of whom was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, al-Qaeda's chief of operational planning, who divulged vast amounts of information that saved hundreds of innocent lives. When extraordinary renditions are queried, historians will ask how else the world's most dangerous terrorists should have been transported. On scheduled flights?

The credit crunch, brought on by the Democrats in Congress insisting upon home ownership for credit-unworthy people, will initially be blamed on Bush, but the perspective of time will show that the problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac started with the deregulation of the Clinton era. Instead Bush's very un-ideological but vast rescue package of $700 billion (£480 billion) might well be seen as lessening the impact of the squeeze, and putting America in position to be the first country out of recession, helped along by his huge tax-cut packages since 2000.

Sneered at for being "simplistic" in his reaction to 9/11, Bush's visceral responses to the attacks of a fascistic, totalitarian death cult will be seen as having been substantially the right ones.

Mistakes are made in every war, but when virtually the entire military, diplomatic and political establishment in the West opposed it, Bush insisted on the surge in Iraq that has been seen to have brought the war around, and set Iraq on the right path. Today its GDP is 30 per cent higher than under Saddam, and it is free of a brutal dictator and his rapist sons.

The number of American troops killed during the eight years of the War against Terror has been fewer than those slain capturing two islands in the Second World War, and in Britain we have lost fewer soldiers than on a normal weekend on the Western Front. As for civilians, there have been fewer Iraqis killed since the invasion than in 20 conflicts since the Second World War.

Iraq has been a victory for the US-led coalition, a fact that the Bush-haters will have to deal with when perspective finally – perhaps years from now – lends objectivity to this fine man's record.
Tags: Первые лица, Пресса, Цитатник
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded