The US presidential election 2004: An outlook

All those equations went awry once after the Super Tuesday triumph a redoubtable senator John Kerry hit the campaign trail as a serious challenger to the war president, George Bush. "A Boston boy, the diligent student of policy and history practically from birth, the 19-year veteran of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as well as a Davos regular with his Rolodex fat with kings, prime ministers and experts of all stripes" John Kerry would deal Bush with more than just kid's gloves. If nothing, it will not be a cake walk for the president surrounded by a cabal of neo-cons -- the ideologues, evangelists, special interests and holdovers from the Reagan-Senior Bush era. As the election campaign gets into full gear the going for Bush will be tougher particularly when the war of which he is the commander-in-chief is in shambles with increasing number of casualties.

Yet Bush's approach to the use of unchallenged and unrivalled American power in pursuit of maximum national interests and even to overreach any defined objective struck a chord with American psyche and released strong emotions in the country confronting which could ultimately be self-destructive. It was only axiomatic that the Democrats could have decided to cast the party as one of peace to combat a 'war president': to question whether the US is at war, to accuse Mr Bush of inflating the danger of terrorism for political gain or to demand an early withdrawal from Afghanistan, Iraq and other overseas engagements. In fact some democrats succumbed to that temptation. Belying those speculations senator Kerry chose to tread a different path. In a surprise address he accepted the premise that the US faces fundamental threat and accused Mr Bush of being too soft in response.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

This brings both the candidates on the same wavelength on the policy of preemption and with regards to the question of war in Iraq. So, as a matter of strategy and conviction (?) John Kerry espouses policies the Bush Administration is already following as if they were his invention. It looks possible that the US' current policies vis-a-vis the rest of the world will remain unaltered even if senator Kerry enters the oval office with the exception that they will henceforth be labelled Kerry doctrine.

The forthcoming race for the White House between the two contestants -- one, a war president and another a decorated veteran of Vietnam war will have its own dynamics with each trying to hit other below his belt. The US death toll in Iraq is well past 500 mark. Many of those killed died after their President famously declared the end official hostilities. An alarming number of suicide victims is a testimony to the massive stress faced by American soldiers occupying Iraq. The election outcome will be determined much by how senator Kerry exploits this bleak situation even by being on the same side of war rationale. As a result, even if the competition will be tough the choice will become narrower.

A large number of questioning Americans already disenchanted with the controversial war as well as the millions across the world left in no doubt about the Bush's skullduggery in launching unjust wars will be disappointed that there is hardly anything to choose in the Presidential Election 2004 -- at least on Iraq War. An uncomfortable truth is becoming clear that on Iraq and allied issues there is really nothing different between Bush and Kerry. The senator supported the war all the way without the slightest compunction. Kerry's only criticism of the war is that Bush went ahead without taking the US' allies along. As a matter of fact Kerry was a card carrying member of the war party. On October 11, 2002 he voted for the resolution authorising the use of force in Iraq. When war started he co-sponsored a Senate resolution stating that the invasion was "lawful and fully authorised by the Congress" and that he "commends and supports the efforts and leadership of the President."

Since then John Kerry never apologised for the stand he took. The democrats are not touching the Iraq war or facing up to it. Neither is Kerry himself interested in that exercise. There seems to be a bipartisan consensus simply to skip the issue and get on with other things. Mr Richard Holbrooke, the secretary of state-in-waiting for a Kerry-led administration is even more hawkish talking passionately of extremism and ruling out any deliberations on either Palestinian issue or Iraq war.

Indeed, having wrapped up Super Tuesday Kerry's problem now is to be able to show where precisely he differs from Bush. During the courses of a marathon campaign he may be able to evolve one, but for the moment there is little to choose between him and Bush.

Brig ( retd) Hafiz is former DG of BIISS.