By Rudabeh Shahbazi
Staff Writer

Recently, President Bush clumped together the three very different countries of Iraq, Iran and North Korea as the “axis of evil.” Using a religious term, such as evil, that stirs emotions is much more powerful in political denunciation than rational discourse. Sadly, Bush seems intent on antagonizing and isolating these regimes rather than engaging them.

Why would our president deliberately provoke hatred instead of friendship and dialogue? By doing so, America is steadily gaining the reputation of being involved in imperialist international politics by demonizing small nations via propaganda. This is nothing new.

In Seoul, a massive banner depicting President Bush with snakes in his hair and missiles protruding from his mouth and ears hung behind a large group of protestors. A national newspaper ran a cartoon of the Statue of Liberty holding warplanes instead of a torch.

Despite reassurances from the White House’s PR representatives scrambling to claim the contrary, many Koreans interpreted Bush’s speech as a war threat against North Korea. The damage has already been done.

“There is a big stream of anti-Americanism on campus, and with Bush’s ‘axis of evil’ remark, it has reached the boiling point,” one South Korean business student said.

During two recent congressional hearings, Secretary of State Colin Powell said Bush is exploring “the most serious set of options that one might imagine” against Iraq.

It’s possible, of course, that President Bush has evidence connecting Iraq to the attacks. But if this is the case, then such evidence must be presented to the general public. At the very least, the Bush administration needs to explain how Iraq represents a greater immediate threat to the United States than the as-yet undefeated Al-Qaeda network.

Many officials, including Iranian President Mohammed Khatami and Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi, have taken steps to improve relations with the U.S. In fact, several international conferences have been held in Iran, with the U.S. invited to participate.

After the Sept. 11 attacks and until the recent U.S. allegations, relations between the estranged governments seemed to improve as Iran condemned the attacks and reminded the world it was a vigorous opponent of the Taliban regime. Moderate Iranians had made friendly overtures to the West, and the government cooperated in arresting militant fundamentalists. Yet none of this was taken into account during Bush’s “axis of evil” speech.

Bush’s hostile words have strengthened the hands of Iran’s religious hard-liners at the expense of its reformers. It’s hard to imagine a more counterproductive U.S. policy.

In an apparent attempt to prepare for action against Iran, President Bush, in his State of the Union address, declared, “Iran aggressively pursues these weapons and exports terror, while an un-elected few repress the Iranian people’s hope for freedom.” Statements such as this are designed to rewrite political reality in order to demonize hostile states and their leaders. The problem is, it isn’t true.     

President Khatami was elected by an overwhelming majority, hardly an “un-elected few.” Perhaps Pakistani “President” Musharraf, whom Bush praised in his speech but who is a military dictator who came to power in a coup, is a better leader.

If Bush intends to attack, one would hope he would at least be honest with the American people. But truth can never be allowed to get in the way of a propaganda campaign.

Recently, the Bush administration also cited Iran’s apparent commitment to destroy the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, but the truth is the United States is simply taking a different side in the conflict, not negotiating peace. The last time I checked, supplying weapons and money to only one side of an armed conflict wasn’t exactly a neutral movement, let alone peaceful progress.         

The U.S. should not equate all who struggle for greater civil and political rights in any country with the terrorists who use violence to achieve their ends, particularly against innocent civilians. And by labeling entire countries as President Bush did in his speech, he has propagated this exact sentiment.                   

As Sen. Chuck Hagel said, “The actions of words have consequences that are very dangerous … when there is little margin of error left.”

The United States might be the strongest country in the world, but it has lost friends.

The support of foreign intelligence agencies that can better camouflage themselves in the appropriate areas are becoming increasingly important during the war on terrorism. Superior intelligence technology cannot serve as a replacement for human intelligence.

The United States must rely on people who know languages, customs and land, people who can move in and out of these same communities without being suspect, in order to infiltrate and expose Al-Qaeda.

Surprise! Such agents will not be Americans. And the depth of our allies’ commitment to this effort will ultimately come down to how aligned they feel with the global order the U.S. is shaping.

America must use the overwhelming advantage of its tremendous power to defend its own interests against threatening situations and people. But we do not need more desperate enemies. Now is the time for prudence, not for turning global empathy and admiration into pervasive anger.

February 21, 2002