LONDON, 3 September 2003 — Victim turned bully? Changed views of the United States two years after the Sept. 11 horrors may haunt Washington’s quest for help in grappling with the bloody aftermath of the Iraq invasion.

The suicide hijack attacks on New York and Washington in 2001 produced a remarkable outpouring of sympathy for America.

Nations briefly set aside their quarrels with US foreign policy and President George W. Bush’s go-it-alone approach, but sympathy soured as Bush declared a vague “war on terror” that he took to Afghanistan and then, far more controversially, to Iraq.

Emad Shahin, a political science professor in Cairo, said Egyptians questioned whether the human suffering of Sept. 11 justified the deaths of thousands of Afghans and Iraqis.

“After the war in Iraq, the United States looks to many like an occupying power in the region, which revives memories of European occupation in the early 20th century and further erodes any sympathy among people in the region,” he said. Disquiet among US allies in Europe centers on Washington’s preference for pre-emptive action, its claim to military and economic primacy and its scorn for multilateral initiatives in areas including global warming and international justice.

Britain and some other countries backed the Iraq war despite domestic critics who doubted the gravity of the threat from Saddam Hussein’s still-unfound weapons of mass destruction.

Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi may give Bush unstinting support, but American use of force has dissipated the post-Sept. 11 solidarity felt by almost all Italians.

“Today every war is possible, at a moment’s notice and everywhere, and the political objectives behind the wars are getting more and more confused and difficult to grasp,” said a recent editorial in Rome’s independent La Stampa daily.

The United States had made clear it would act alone on Iraq if need be, putting the onus on the UN Security Council to “prove its relevance” by endorsing war. The council declined.

Iraq’s postwar travail has refocused debate on the limits of US solo power, especially after last month’s bombings of the Jordanian Embassy, UN headquarters and outside a mosque.

The Bush administration has now for the first time signaled interest in a UN-mandated multinational force. But it will be loath to let despised opponents of the Iraq war, notably France, claim vindication for their views.

French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin said Paris wanted a genuine change of policy in Iraq before the US “logic of force” triggered a spiral of confrontation and collapse.

“We must end the ambiguity, transfer responsibilities and allow the Iraqis to play the role they deserve as soon as possible,” he said last week. Bush may win public approval at home by painting the fight with Iraqi insurgents, now said to include foreign militants, as part of the “war on terror”, but many in the Middle East see the US-led occupation itself as the problem.

“There are grave concerns it will encourage the activities of fundamentalists in the region who blame Gulf countries for supporting the invasion,” said a government official in Oman.

Long before the war, many Arabs and Muslims viewed US foreign policy as an extension of Israel. Arab leaders such as Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak have argued that the US role in Iraq will fuel terrorism, not dampen it.

Arabs fume at what they see as America’s unstinting support for Israel, even as it occupies and settles Palestinian land. They resent US attitudes that conflate the Palestinian struggle against occupation with global terrorism and perceived double standards toward Israeli and Palestinian violence.

“It is not Osama Bin Laden, but America’s arrogance and anti-Muslim policy which have given birth to terrorism,” said Ahmed Suleiti, a civil engineer in Qatar, in remarks echoed widely in the region.

Yemeni political analyst Sami Ghaleb said the United States was “threatening the collective security of the world” with its support for Israeli policies and its threats to Syria and Iran. “Generally, there’s admiration for the American people and the country’s technological edge,” said Ahmad Baghdadi, a political science professor in pro-US Kuwait.

“The problem lies in US policy in the Middle East and its role in the war on terrorism, which started militarily and is ending ideologically,” he said.