PAEAN FULLY OBVIOUS:

Bush's bid for a Wilsonesque legacy (Sung-Yoon Lee, 2/09/05, Asia Times)

If Woodrow Wilson had set the tone for his would-be-proselytizers-of-democracy successors, then Harry Truman in the mid-20th century took it in a much more ambitious and bellicose direction with his doctrine of containment, that "it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressure", and that the US "must assist free peoples to work out their own destinies in their own way". This would later morph into a much more martial message, in what would be labeled the "Truman Doctrine": that the US would provide military and economic assistance whenever and wherever an anti-communist government was threatened.

On to the fire that Truman had lit John F Kennedy poured fuel with another impracticably noble and forceful contention. In Kennedy's inaugural address of 1961 the world was treated to an alliterative affirmation of US ambitions: "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and success of liberty."

As historians go on arguing about the extent to which such strong words and their selective implementation in terms of actual military, political and economic policy bore on winning the Cold War, the rest of the world will remember those who spoke them more for the spirit of hope and justice contained in their words. In comparing the open-ended idealism advanced in these past statements to that expressed in the two high-profile speeches over the past two weeks, Bush's rhetoric stands up surprisingly well.

Say what you will about the inconsistency of Bush's foreign policy during his first term, or the astonishing advances recently apparent in his oratorical skill; with his State of the Union Address it became clear that he really meant what he had read in his Inaugural Address 10 days before: that US policy henceforth shall be "the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world". On both occasions, with the world as his audience, Bush confidently declaimed, "When you stand for liberty, America will stand with you."

If the president's message in his inaugural speech had come across as little more than a pleasing paean to "freedom", then the word was truly given flesh in his address to the joint session of Congress. Specific countries were called out by name, as Bush exhorted their governments and people to embark on reforms: Afghanistan, Morocco, Jordan, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and, of course, Iraq. To the Syrian government a veiled threat was thrown in addition: End all support for terror. To North Korea Bush showed restraint and lured the hostile nuclear state back to the negotiating table. In the case of US support for political, economic, and security reforms in Palestine, Bush even mentioned a specific sum - US$350 million. But the most emphatic pledge of US commitment to promoting freedom abroad came when Bush, relishing the spotlight of the world, looked straight into the camera and proclaimed, "And to the Iranian people, I say tonight: As you stand for your own liberty, America stands with you."

Okay, so you've got a theme of universal democratization that you can trace at least from Wilson through FDR, Truman, JFK, LBJ, Reagan, and Clinton to Gorge W. Bush--is it not possible to draw a broader conclusion here? Perhaps something to the effect that America has fairly consistently been a Crusader State and this president just happens to be the most eloquent and effective crusader?

Posted by Orrin Judd at February 8, 2005 10:06 AM