US President Bush outlines transition plans in speech

Producer: Felix Tan
First broadcast: 25 May 04, Radio Singapore International

In the first in a series of confidence-building speeches on Monday, US President George W. Bush outlined broad plans for Iraq’s return to sovereignty on June 30th.

The speech did not unveil any new policy initiatives.

President Bush, however, did mention that that the notorious Abu Ghraib prison would be demolished.

The president’s address was panned by almost all major television networks in the United States except CNN.

But will this speech boost his ratings for the upcoming Presidential election in November?

Felix Tan put this question to Dr. John Hart (JH), of the Australian National University in Canberra:

JH: “Well, it was certainly meant to be and the speech was set against the disastrous public opinion polls that came out in the Washington Post yesterday. It showed the President’s approval ratings are at an all-time low with negative ratings higher than his positive ratings. And some really poor public opinion on Bush’s handling of the war in Iraq. The American public are basically losing their enthusiasm for the war in Iraq in a big way. And the opinion polls in the Washington Post, for example, showed that 50 percent of Americans thought the war in Iraq now was not worth fighting; 65 percent thinks that the Bush administration has got bogged down in Iraq; 58 percent thinks that Bush hasn’t got a clear plan for handling Iraq; and 40 percent of the Americans public now seem to want the withdrawal of American troops in Iraq immediately. So, those figures are not good for Bush and that was the context in which he made the speech.”

Now a lot of references have been made to the war in Iraq - understandably so.

Now, who do you think this speech is ultimately for - the vast majority of Americans or the international community or even the Iraqis and the Middle East community?

JH: “Very, very difficult to say. I think Bush is hoping that it will appeal to all of those and more. My view is that it was, maybe, primarily intended for Republican Party faithfuls who are losing, you know…who are becoming more sceptical and more dubious. I do not think Bush thinks that he will be able to win over Democratic oppositions to the war in Iraq. Maybe his prime aim was to shore up the Republican Party faithfuls. If the message was meant for Iraqis, I am not sure that it is going to have much effect at all because it does not answer the kinds of things the Republican Party want answers. But one of the interesting thing about the speech is that none of the three major networks in the United States covered it. It wasn’t televised ‘live’ on ABC, NBC or CBS. The only television company that took it was CNN on cable. So, you know, one wonders what its impact really was. I mean, the major networks have kind of written it off before it has even been given.”

In his speech, he also said that America would send more troops if needed to Iraq. Now, how would the majority of Americans react to this, given the recent developments in Iraq?

JH: “Well, as I said, the American public is losing its sympathy for the war in Iraq. And Bush wasn’t specific on increasing numbers, but he also wasn’t specific on withdrawing American troops. And I think the American public now would probably be more interested in a definite statement about the withdrawal of American troops than an increased number of troops in Iraq.”

US President George W. Bush also said that the Abu Ghraib prison would be demolished after the handover on June 30th. But is this just a ploy to remove any so-called residue of American brutality or abuses in Iraq?

JH: “What he actually said was that they would build a new prison and then demolish the Abu Ghraib prison. I think that is pure symbolism. Unfortunately, I have to say it was the only really new thing in Bush’s speech, I mean, there wasn’t much else about the Iraq policy that we didn’t already know. And I the media will pick on this piece of symbolism and frankly, if it hasn’t the effect on the public, I do not think it will have a very long-lasting effect. I mean, the real problems are problems that Bush did not address. The problems are how long the US troops will stay and how much longer will the US troops continue to be killed or injured in the war in Iraq? He did not clarify how America can hand over sovereignty to Iraq while US troops are still there. He said nothing at all about how the United States is going to achieve a representative democratic assembly in Iraq, although he was insistent that election for a transitional assembly would be held by January next year. Commentators are very, very sceptical about that. And there was really nothing in his speech to deal with the problem of the treatment of Iraqi prisoners. And you know, more evidence are becoming more available about the mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners right at the time that Bush was making the speech. I mean, Bush’s line is that it was just a handful of American reservists who were responsible for this and clearly, the evidence is pointing in the other direction. So, in some respect, the speech wasn’t entirely realistic about problems that needed to be addressed.”