WASHINGTON, 29 June 2004 — The invasion of Iraq and stunning, lightning-speed ouster of Saddam Hussein’s regime was once a major asset for US President George W. Bush’s re-election.
But in a form of self-inflicted political harakiri, Iraq has become a liability for the president. The Baghdad regime collapsed in early April, but as the occupation wore on through the long, hot summer months, approval at home for Bush’s Iraq policy began to erode. The December capture of Saddam — dirty, disheveled and cowering in a hole — gave Bush a strong but fleeting boost in public opinion.
Six weeks of renewed fighting against insurgents — a mix of Saddam loyalists and militants — produced a surge in US military casualties in April. Public approval for the war dipped sharply, and the prison abuse scandal that arose in May further reinforced the impression of a “quagmire”.
Following legal handover of sovereignty to a new Iraqi government, new polls showed that a majority of Americans now believe that the Bush administration’s Iraq endeavor was not worth the price in blood and treasure.
When the handover was negotiated in November 2003, it gave the Bush administration a possible escape hatch — if only symbolic — for its Iraq policy just four months before the elections.
The Iraqi Governing Council agreed on an interim constitution on March 1, and the document was signed a week later after accommodating demands by the country’s Shiite majority for earlier elections by January 2005. For weeks, the opposition center-left Democrats criticized the handover plan, pointing out that it was unclear what Iraqi body would receive sovereignty. That criticism was muted on June 1 by the appointment of an interim government under President Ghazi Al-Yawer and Prime Minister Iyad Allawi, who de facto took over immediately as the Iraqi Governing Council dissolved itself.
The new Iraqi leaders were quickly recognized by many governments in the region and beyond and soon came to New York to meet with the United Nations Security Council. The icing on the cake was the G-8 conference, hosted by Bush at Sea Island, Georgia, where Al-Yawer shared the world stage with leaders of the most important industrial economies.
But critics — inside Iraq, around the world and among the US political opposition — say that the handover is more style than substance. About 140,000 US troops, plus 20,000 forces from Britain and other countries, will still be in Iraq, and won’t be leaving anytime soon.
Allawi will command only the new Iraqi police and security troops, which remain largely untested forces of dubious reliability. He has warned of “a great catastrophe” if the US-led coalition leaves Iraq, but also cautioned that the new government will defend its prerogatives.
In American politics, conventional wisdom holds that presidents are re-elected or defeated based on the economy. After a brief recession in 2001 and sluggish growth amid terrorism and war, the US economy has grown by 5 percent in the last 12 months, the fastest pace in 20 years. Bush’s long-negative ratings on the economy are now improving, just as the tide of public opinion on Iraq has turned against him.
The latest survey released in late June by the respected Gallup Poll shows that — for the first time — a majority of Americans believe the Iraq war was a mistake, by 54 percent to 44 percent. At the start of the war, the same survey question found only 23 percent who thought it was a mistake.
Yet Bush has also gained ground against his major-party opponent, bouncing back from six points down to take a lead of 49 percent to 48 percent lead over US Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the nominee of the Democratic Party.
For Bush, the election is likely to remain at best a statistical dead heat until the vote on Nov. 2, unless the outcome of the handover in Iraq produces results soon.
