As it’s Friday and you should all be tired from a week of
grueling study, I’m going to start with a game.
I’ve named it “Guess the Country” and it
shouldn’t be too taxing for your weary brains. Basically,
I’ll give you a description from the Amnesty International
2004 report documenting human rights abuses around the world, and
you have to guess which country I’m describing.
Sound fun? Trust me on this one, it gets interesting.
Country No. 1: The “Army killed around 600 … in 2004,
including more than 100 children. Most were killed unlawfully
““ in reckless shooting, shelling, and bombing in civilian
residential areas, in extra-judicial executions and through
excessive use of force.”
Country No. 2: “Torture and ill-treatment of detainees
continued to be systematic. … The authorities maintained bans on
several political parties imposed in previous years and party
newspapers remained suspended. People continued to be detained,
tried and imprisoned in violation of their rights to freedom of
expression and association.”
And lastly, Country No. 3: “In 2004, more than 3,000
civilians were killed for political motives and at least 600
“˜disappeared.’ … The government and security forces
stepped up their campaign to undermine the legitimacy of human
rights defenders, peace activists and trade unionists.”
I’m guessing your head is swirling with ideas of Iraq
before the U.S. and British invasion, maybe North Korea under its
tyrannous leader Kim Jong-Il, or what about Taliban-ruled
Afghanistan?
Unfortunately for those Republicans who rapturously gobbled up
the stirring words of Bush’s inaugural speech last week,
these are descriptions of Israel, Egypt and Colombia, respectively.
And what do these countries have in common? Well, they are first,
second and third on the list of the biggest recipients of U.S.
military and economic aid.
This made it all the more comical when last Thursday, filled
with Churchillian vigor, Bush sent out his peaceable message to the
world. “All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know:
The United States will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your
oppressors. When you stand for liberty, we will stand with
you.”
Now, I would love more than anything to shut down my faculty of
reason and believe that George W. Bush will ride his chariot
through the dark corners of the world, holding up the torch of
freedom and touching the oppressed with the gift of liberty and
democracy. But I can’t do it, not even for a misty-eyed
second. If Bush was serious about standing at the side of liberty,
would he really be contributing almost $2 billion (half of it used
to buy weaponry) to Egypt each year?
What about Israel, a country condemned by the U.N. Security
Council repeatedly for atrocities against the Palestinians and
violations of international law? Do they deserve the $2.6 billion
they receive annually?
And last on the list, Colombia. The torture, kidnapping and
murder committed by Colombia’s government is gruesome. During
2003 alone, around 2,200 people were kidnapped. According to the
human rights organization Global Exchange, since the United States
began sending aircrafts and on-the-ground training to Colombia in
2000, politically motivated killings have risen from 14 to 20 per
day, and the number of kidnappings and disappearances has
doubled.
So what does the marauding bringer of liberty do? Well, last
November, Bush asked Congress to prolong the generous aid package
to Colombia for the years to come, adding to the $3 billion donated
over the past five years.
And you don’t have to search through obscure left-wing
publications for further examples of the Bush
administration’s disregard for democracy. Look only at the
run up to the war in Iraq.
Europe was divided into two groups of countries: those who took
the same position as the overwhelming majority of their citizens
and those who overruled their populations and supported the
war.
Rumsfeld contemptuously called the first group “Old
Europe” and gave the second group the more sanguine epithet,
“New Europe.” New Europe was cast as the hope for the
future of democracy. Old Europe, on the other hand, was the bad guy
because these governments had the audacity to carry out their
democratic function and follow the wishes of the vast majority of
their population.
And when the Turkish government decided to take the line of over
90 percent of their population and not offer troops for the Iraq
war, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz lashed out at the
Turkish military for not playing “the strong leadership role
we would have expected.”
This ostentatious contempt for European and Turkish democracy is
quite remarkable, but not entirely surprising. Bush and his team of
thugs treat democracy and freedom like they do international law
““ they support it when it serves their purpose.
Now, if you didn’t score very well in my game, don’t
worry. The American media is not fond of telling the public about
the corrupt regimes their tax money supports. But Bush would have
scored three out of three. He must know about these
governments’ vile behavior, but continues to lavish them with
aid.
Sunday is the first election in Iraq in over 50 years, and it
should be a cause of celebration for everyone. After 40 years of
Saddam Hussein’s tyranny and over a decade of murderous
U.S.-U.N. sanctions, the Iraqi people are finally getting to speak
for themselves. But when Bush and his cohorts give their customary
tear-jerking eulogies to the beauty of freedom and democracy, I
hope you remember what they really stand for.
The Bush administration uses the rhetoric of salvation, hope and
democracy to pursue an agenda that undermines all these things. To
them, democracy is not only a game, but a game they always have to
win. Anyone remember the “election” in 2000?
Kennard is a third-year history student. E”“mail him at
mkennard@media.ucla.edu.