Some of us were less enthusiastic than others during George W. Bush's second presidential inauguration Thursday. True, the ceremony ran smoothly, and the president was articulate, but his inaugural address raised some interesting ethical questions that have loomed over the presidency for the past four years.
In his address, Bush said it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture -- in theory, an admirable goal. In practice, however, this policy might prove less than practical. The president has said the United States has succeeded in achieving its goal of liberating the people of Iraq and freeing them from a tyrannical dictator. This sediment does not reflect the fact insurgents in places like Mosul, Iraq, and the northern part of the country are busy torching election materials and issuing death threats to election day poll workers and voters. Just last week, a gunman killed the director of a Baghdad election center. Iraqi presidential candidate Mithal al-Alousi has been the victim of attempted murder twice this month, according to CNN. BBC News reports civilians are generally concerned that insurgent raids will overshadow the election.
Bush also said during his address that "freedom, by its nature, must be chosen, and defended by citizens." USA Today reported at the beginning of this month that more Iraqi interim government officials are calling for postponement of the Jan. 30 elections. The Sunni political party has pulled all candidates from the ballots and is planning to boycott the elections. The Iraqi ambassador to the United Nations has recommended the elections be postponed at a least a few weeks. It would appear that this country is neither choosing nor defending democracy at this time. Some of Bush's statements seem to contradict themselves.
It is quite understandable that the United States wants to send a clear message to the insurgents about their lack of success in intimidating the spread of democracy, but Iraq is far away. It's easy to support a school of thought with which we in this country cannot directly relate. We in the United States can go to the polls freely - though about half of us choose not to. In Iraq, the fact of the matter is that many people are going to lose their lives for voting. They will be shot in cold blood where they stand among their friends and family members, and that's just a risk we're willing to take and a price we're willing to pay to ensure that the terrorists and the rest of the world see that we're not intimidated. Is it worth it? The United States experienced bloodshed and challenges to become a democracy, but we chose that path. We were not forced to adjust to the drastic changes in one year's time. I want the Iraqi people to be free of oppression, but I also want them to be free of fear. Even Bush said Thursday morning that the great objective of ending tyranny is the concentrated work of generations. The process of forming a democracy is a long one, and I hope for the future of the new Bush administration that the United States uses its influence not only confidently, as the president suggested, but cautiously as well.
Write to Alyssa at akmiller@bsu.edu
Read More
Three Air Jam teams take home the win
October 12, 2012Nineteen teams shimmied, shook and flipped for a sold out John R. Emens Auditorium on Thursday night during the 25th annual Air Jam.
Bill Clinton Speaks at North Central High School
October 12, 2012Former President's Speech Could Have Effect on State Senate Race
