US President George W. Bush sacrificed his right-hand man in the Iraq War, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, as his administration scrambled on Wednesday to find its feet after a bruising election defeat that brought the Democrats to power in Congress.
Only days after saying Rumsfeld would stay until the end of the Bush administration in 2009, the president accepted the resignation of the man who had become synonymous with the Iraq War, the broader "war on terror" and the neo-conservative project to pacify the Middle East. Former CIA director Robert Gates will be the new defense secretary, Bush said.
Bush admitted that his party had received "a thumping" in Tuesday's elections. Democrats won the House of Representatives with a net gain of about 30 seats.
"I recognize that many Americans voted last night to register their displeasure with the lack of progress being made" in Iraq, he said at a news conference at the White House. "Yet I also believe most Americans -- and leaders here in Washington from both political parties -- understand we cannot accept defeat."
The future of the Senate remained uncertain on Wednesday. The Democrats controlled 50 seats, after a tight race in Montana was declared in their favor. The Republicans controlled 49.
The last Senate seat, in Virginia, was still undecided as poll workers counted absentee and provisional ballots watched by lawyers. Democratic candidate James Webb held a narrow lead over Republican incumbent George Allen.
The election broke the Republican monopoly of power in Washington which has lasted for most of Bush's presidency, apart from an 18-month spell when the Democrats held a one-vote majority in the Senate. The Democrats have not held the House for 12 years.
Bush pledged to work together with the Democrats in Congress, and is due to have lunch today with House speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi, a San Francisco congresswoman who, when sworn in, will be second in line in presidential succession after Vice President Dick Cheney.
A few days before Tuesday's vote Pelosi described the president as "incompetent," "dangerous" and "in denial." Bush said he accepted that such language was all part of the campaigning and pointed out he had been in tough contests before.
"This isn't my first rodeo," he said.
Pelosi also promised to try to bring "civility and bipartisanship" to Washington, but said the Democratic gains on Tuesday reflected a deep desire among Americans for change, particularly in Iraq.
"It will give a fresh start to finding a solution to Iraq, rather than staying the course," Pelosi said.
It was unclear yesterday how much of a change of course in Iraq Rumsfeld's departure indicated. Bush has said he was open to the suggestions of a bipartisan panel, the Iraq Study Group, of which Gates is a member, which is due to make recommendations in a few weeks.
Bush said that he, like the Democrats, wanted the troops to come home, but he wanted them "to come home to victory."
Daniel Goure, a Pentagon adviser and a military analyst at the Lexington Institute in Washington, said the choice of Gates suggested that Bush was not prepared to make a significant change of direction.
"The more things change the more they remain the same," Goure said. "Bob Gates is the second to last person I would expect to be chosen. He has no military experience but the point is he will not cross the president and vice-president."
Days before Tuesday's vote, Bush denied any plans to dispense with Rumsfeld, saying he was doing "a fantastic job." Yesterday he argued he had not wanted "to inject such a major decision into the last days of the campaign."
He said he had made the decision "after a series of thoughtful conversations" with Rumsfeld, and a meeting with Gates at his Crawford ranch on Sunday.
Rumsfeld had offered his resignation before, in the wake of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal in 2003, but the president turned it down. At yesterday's press conference, Bush was asked whether he had full confidence in Cheney and whether the vice president would stay on.
"Yes he does, yes he will," the president replied.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing