MEDIA REACTION U. S. FOREIGN POLICY, BUSH'S VISIT

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 HARARE 001476 SIPDIS DEPT FOR AF/PDPA FOR DALTON, MITCHELL AND SIMS IRAQ PD FOR SMITH, PINESS AND ROOKARD NSC FOR JENDAYI FRAZER LONDON FOR GURNEY PARIS FOR NEARY NAIROBI FOR PFLAUMER E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PREL KPAO KMDR ZI SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION U. S. FOREIGN POLICY, BUSH'S VISIT TO AFRICA AND IRAQ; HARARE ¶1. The July 20 editions of the two government-controlled weeklies - "The Sunday Mail" and the "Sunday News" - carried lengthy articles centering on United States foreign policy, President George W. Bush's visit to Africa, and another urging the United States to look to the United Nations for a new resolution on Iraq. Excerpts follow: ¶2. Under headline "U. S., British definition of democracy warped," the "Sunday Mail" printed the following opinion piece by Munyaradzi Mugowo in which he argues: ". . .(President George W.) Bush and (Prime Minister) Tony Blair's arrogation that the Zimbabwean government has defied all democratic norms is a statement that is both strange and lousy seen in the light of the crisis of definition that it unwarrantedly presents to the political discourse. This definitional bigotry is deliberate and functions on probabilistic logic, to further the hidden foreign policy agendas of these world bullies. . .It sounds absolutely awkward to define as dictatorship and gross misrule, the Zimbabwean government's opposition to U. S. habit of using economic power to impose unjust policies as well to manipulate the notion of political pluralism as an excuse for craftily assisting the political ascendancy of the opposition MDC (Movement for Democratic Change). . .The view which the Americans have of themselves as selfless humanitarians is a mystification of their double standards which thrive on their habit of deceitfully sacralizing (sic) non- universal ideologies abstracted from a value system peculiar to them which they globalize as a general convention of good governance, in an effort to mobilize overwhelming support, even from victims, for their own self-interests pursuits. In view of this, the voices of Bush and Powell, though feigning a moral concern with the plight and welfare of `good Zimbabweans' through honeyed words, baseless claims and allegations which are nonetheless a clumsily prepared salad of hatred of President Mugabe, myths about the country and a string of libertarian voodoos, not only set the tone, but also make an upward adjustment to the volume of the Anglo-U. S. foreign policy crusades in Southern Africa. On a global scale, recent world events have plainly shown that the U. S. has literally turned Washington into an informal capital of the world, and Washington's policies, doctrines and decrees, into more or less sacrosanct prototypes upon which a world order closely coterminous with any corpus of the U. S. overseas commerce has been modeled. . .For reasons much less moral than its claims, the U. S. has solemnly sworn to patronize the system on the globe, ousting alleged `dictators,' birthing and baby- sitting infant Third World democracies, and raising the `proper' way, weaned ones which have already been engrafted into the U. S.-led `global village' as its faithful satellites. . . ." ¶3. Under headline "Mbeki's diplomatic skills convinced Bush," Bulawayo-based Chief Reporter, Hebert Zharare, wrote the following op-ed in which he asserts: "Fears of being branded a racist, and President Thabo Mbeki's diplomatic skills, were instrumental in U. S. President George W. Bush's change of stance on Zimbabwe after meeting the South African leader two weeks ago. . .Mr. Bush surprised many, particularly the opposition MDC (Movement for Democratic Change),when he said he was of `one mind' with President Mbeki on the issue of Zimbabwe. The MDC expected Mr. Bush to intimidate President Mbeki to change his `quiet diplomacy' approach towards Harare and renew calls for the ouster of President Mugabe. However, it was Mr. Bush who came out of the meeting singing a different tune. . .The American leader's divide and rule tactics of dangling incentives to Zimbabwe's neighbors in a ploy to coerce them to support his anti-Zimbabwe call failed as the African leaders reaffirmed their previous statements that Zimbabwean problems cannot be solved by foreigners. . . ." ¶4. Under headline "Will the U. N. bail out George ¶W. Bush?" the "Sunday News" carried the following feature article by Jim Lobe in which he states: "Make no mistake: U. S. President George W. Bush is in big trouble. Whereas a week ago, Americans were talking about the dreaded `V' word - for Vietnam - this week the dreaded `W' word - for Watergate - was back in vogue, even as the `V' word was still in use. Watergate plus Vietnam is about the worst combination for a sitting president that anyone could possibly imagine. And the almost daily announcement on the news that another U. S. soldier has been killed in an attack in Iraq. . .recalls nothing so much as the daily reminders on the evening news 23 years ago that killed the presidency of Jimmy Carter. . .Short of a miracle - such as the discovery of a cache of weapons of mass destruction. . .or the return of robust U. S. economic growth that can quickly bring the unemployment rate down to five percent - there is probably only one way that Bush can save his presidency at this point. But the cost in personal pride and policy will be extremely high. To save his administration, Bush must now essentially abandon the aggressive unilateralism (sic) that has dominated his foreign policy since even before 11 September 2001; ask forgiveness from U. S. allies who refused to join his `coalition of the willing' in Iraq; and return to the United Nations Security Council for a new resolution that will give the world body control over the occupation. . . ." SULLIVAN