The handover of Iraqi sovereignty by the allied forces to the interim Iraqi government is a new milestone for the Bush administration.
The US government is still in control in Iraq, but the transfer gives rise to a new opportunity for the US to change the tide there as well as holding important implications for US President George W. Bush's upcoming re-election campaign.
While the handover is certainly the right thing to do, the future of Iraq and its people remains uncertain at this point. The biggest accomplishment of the Bush administration in Iraq is in bringing down Saddam Hussein's regime and his subsequent arrest. Particularly noteworthy is the fact that after the handover, Saddam will be tried by the Iraqi people -- the real victims of Saddam's ruthless reign -- through the new interim Iraqi government.
It would be an intolerable insult to the Iraqi people if Saddam was to be tried by a foreign government such as the US. As for whether the Bush administration can one day take credit for installing lasting democratic rule in Iraq, it remains to be seen.
Many people continue to doubt the ability of the interim government to remain in power with the backdrop of continuing chaos in Iraq. In fact, on the first day after the handover on Monday, nine people, including three US soldiers and six Iraqis, lost their lives as a result of attacks by insurgents.
Moreover, it remains doubtful whether the troops of the interim government are capable of maintaining law and order and fighting insurgents against such a backdrop. Not only are they inadequately trained and equipped, the rate of dessertion in these troops is as high as 80 percent. Yet, if the interim government continues to rely almost entirely on US troops to keep order, the significance of the handover of sovereignty will be highly reduced -- not to mention that many will probably begin to wonder if the handover simply serves as a smoke screen for continued US occupation.
Under the circumstances, the fact that UN peacekeeping troops will be stepping in to help the situation is a step in the right direction. On the other hand, it is also undeniable that Bush has suffered grave injuries in terms of popular support, in particular voter support, over the past 14 months of US occupation. Most damaging to Bush is the fact that weapons of mass destruction have not been found in Iraq, which weakens the legitimacy and justification of the war and the occupation.
Gruesome retaliation by terrorist groups in Iraq, including the kidnapping and decapitation of foreign hostages -- as well as the Iraqi prisoner abuse scandal -- have not only shocked the entire world but also generated serious skepticism about whether too great a price was paid to bring down Saddam's regime. Even US government reports have conceded that the goal of reducing the number of terrorist attacks has largely failed in post-Saddam Iraq.
Whether this was the intended impact of the war -- which will also probably determine Bush's place in the history -- remains to be seen. Under the circumstances, the handover of sovereignty on Monday has focused world attention (as well as US voters) on the future prospects for the reconstruction of Iraqi and away from all the negative events over the past few months.
The results of the power transfer may well reinforce the legitimacy of bringing down Saddam's regime. As for what kind of impact the handover will have on the US presidential election, only time will tell.
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US