President Bush's new doctrine of 'Freedom and Liberty'!

The question is : Is it by force or by persuasion? Some analysts say that force is currently out of the question as the US forces are bogged down heavily in Iraq for a considerable period, although his Vice President Dick Cheney made some noises that Israel might attack Iran first to destroy its nuclear facilities.

At a 21-minute speech, reportedly a text written and edited more than a dozen times, President Bush used the word "freedom" 27 times and the word "liberty" 15 times. The first American President in almost 30 years to be sworn in during a time of war. America's 43rd President entered his second term with one of the lowest approval ratings. The major European allies were not enthused in his inauguration, given his track record in Iraq.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

President Bush did not name the leaders of "outlaw regimes" but Dr. Condoleezza Rice (Secretary of State in waiting) referred to a few regimes that include Iran, North Korea and Zimbabwe. Cuba must also be there as one of the "outposts of tyranny".

Empirical evidence suggests that America always wanted a "Strong Person" in developing countries rather than a democratically elected head of state/government. This is because a democratically elected executive of a country cannot dance easily to the tune of America. Dictators without accountability can.

In 1973, the democratically elected President Salvador Allende of Chile was overthrown with the active support of America to install a dictator General Augusto Pinochet who ruled the country with an "iron fist" until 1990 and allowed US multinational corporations to use fully its resources and market. In South Asia, America had always supported dictators in Pakistan and embraced the country into a mutual defence treaty in the mid 50s.

There is a saying that the hidden hand of the market will never work without the hidden fist -- McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the first designer of F-15 aircraft. Many say that America adheres to this doctrine to spread its business to survive.

The idea of spreading freedom and democracy is a noble idea but is the President seriously interested in doing so? Let us examine how the doctrine of "freedom" is implemented by the Bush administration in the past.

First, the Central Asian Republics are run by totalitarian regimes. Some of the countries have Presidents for life. Who is helping them? Again the US, for its strategic interest, has established its military bases and placed its armed forces in some of the countries, the backyard of Russian Federation. Freedom and liberty are far away from ordinary people in these countries.

Second, Pakistan President Musharraf, as earlier promised, did not relinquish his "second hat" as Chief of Army on grounds of security of the country. Is not the action of the President Musharraf contrary to democratic principle? Why is the Bush administration silent on this issue? It is the Bush administration that has pumped billion of dollars to the military regime in Pakistan in return for its fight against Al-Qaeda militants in Afghanistan. The Parliament and the Prime Minister of the country can be dismissed by the military President. Does the US President want democracy of this type spread and flourish across the world?

Third, while in Iran there is an elected President, in many countries of the Arab World, no election is held. Why then Iran is considered as one of the "outlawed regimes" in which "freedom" is to be spread? President Bush may also try to influence his "friends" in the Arab World to adopt democratic principles. Democracy of the type that America wishes to impose on the Arab countries has been rejected recently by them in Morocco. Many cynical political analysts believe that to introduce democracy in the Arab world is like trying to unravel a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. Did Dr. Rice include any oil-rich country as one of the "outposts of tyranny"? If not, why not?

Fourth, why a democratically elected President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez is not supported by the Bush administration? Is it because his links with Cuba? Do the democratic principles outweigh by extraneous considerations?

Fifth, leading by example is the best policy. The Bush administration is known world-wide as the instrument that jails "terrorists" without trial. Many have spent months after months in Guantanamo Bay military base without any rights until the US Courts intervened. Equally unpleasant are the revelations from the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. This is no example to set for a country that proclaims principles of "freedom and liberty" to others. A country known for its fight for freedom and democratic values is now perceived as the "bully" to advance its own interests. With the negative image around the world, is the Bush administration capable of spreading the message of "freedom and liberty" to others?

Finally, existence of poverty negates freedom and democracy. The prevailing endemic poverty in many of the developing countries is the breeding ground of frustration and desperation of young people. Frustrated unemployed youths are lured away by extremist elements. Last April, at a meeting with the leaders, World Bank President Wolfensohn said that US$900 billion were being spent on defence per year while only US$60 billion were disbursed as aid. None of the G-8 rich countries including the US has spent targeted 0.7 per cent of their gross national income on foreign aid. Is this the way to fight poverty and spread freedom and liberty?

President Bush's inauguration speech reminds me of what Lord Ponsonby wrote in 1928: " Between nations, where the consequences are vital, the most upright men honestly believe there is no depth of duplicity to which they may not legitimately stoop. They have got to do it. The thing cannot go on without the help of lies... in war time, failure to lie is negligence, the doubting of a lie a misdemeanour, the declaration of truth a crime." People can judge whether Lord Ponsonby is right or wrong.

Barrister Harun ur Rashid is a former Bangladesh Ambassador to the UN, Geneva.