Media Reaction: President Bush's State of the Union

UNCLAS DHAKA 000524 SIPDIS FOR I/FW, B/G, IIP/G/NEA-SA, B/VOA/N (BANGLA SERVICE) STATE FOR SA/PAB, SA/PPD (LSCENSNY, SSTRYKER),SA/RA, INR/R/MR, AND PASS TO USAID FOR ANE/ASIA/SA/B (WJOHNSON) CINCPAC FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY ADVISOR, J51 (MAJ TURNER),J45 (MAJ NICHOLLS) USARPAC FOR APOP-IM (MAJ HEDRICK) E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KMDR OIIP OPRC KPAO PREL ETRD PTER ASEC BG OCII SUBJECT: Media Reaction: President Bush's State of the Union Address; Dhaka Summary: Many newspapers express concern about the President's state of the union address. -------------- STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS -------------- "Bush's Hard-Fisted Diplomacy" Independent English language daily "New Age" editorially commented (02/06/05): President George W. Bush has demonstrated in his latest State of the Union address the characteristics, which his earlier two-term predecessors have shown, which is to emphasis America's role in the world. But where this president differs from those earlier ones is in his determination to see the world in terms of black and white. Mr. Bush and the people around him have had little time in the last four years to consider anything of the grayish kind in their politics. It now appears that the habit or inclination has not changed. For Bush supporters in America, that may be a good instance of strong leadership. For the outside world, it is a matter of serious worry. The US President has singled out Iran and Syria in his speech as sponsors of terrorism. He has thus made it clear that the war on terror he inaugurated in the aftermath of 11 September 2001 will go on as long as he does not get his way. That attitude is fraught with huge risks, for it once more raises the specter of a world where American soldiers, in company with their allies, will take upon themselves the job of correcting what they think is wrong. -------------- "President Bush's State of the Union Address" Independent English daily "The News Today" editorial (02/05/05) comments: Reading through President George W. Bush's second state of the union address one gets the chilling feeling that the next four years of his presidency would be no different from his first term as he continues to speak in the language of weapons. In fact there is nothing in his address to feel cheerful about or to raise the spirits of a world living in constant fear of unilateral U.S. decisions. The main focus of the address is the troubled Middle East. He refused to set a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, has warned Syria and Iran in no uncertain terms, rebuked allies like Saudi Arabia and Egypt for not doing enough to democratize their countries and was ecstatic in claiming that a Palestinian state was within reach at long last. It was never in doubt that U.S. troops would stay in Iraq indefinitely or may even permanently if the new Iraqi regime so desires but that perhaps means until a stooge enough regime is in place to request a permanent presence. Thomas