The Hindu : Opinion / Leader Page Articles : Fiction's triumph over truth

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Friday, Apr 30, 2004

Opinion

Opinion - Leader Page Articles

Fiction's triumph over truth

By Sidney Blumenthal

For those who backed Bush over war in Iraq, the idea of proof has shifted from fact to fervour.

PERHAPS THE most important divide in the American presidential campaign is between fact and fiction. There are, of course, other sharp distinctions based on region and religiosity, guns and gays, abstinence and abortion. But were the election to be decided on domestic concerns alone, George W. Bush would be near certain to join the ranks of one-term Presidents — like his father after the aura of the Gulf War evaporated.

But one year after Mr. Bush's triumphant May Day landing on the deck of the USS Lincoln and appearance behind a "Mission Accomplished" sign, his splendid little war has entered a Stalingrad-like phase of urban siege and house-to-house combat. April has been the bloodiest month by far — 122 U.S. soldiers killed compared with 73 last April in the supposed last month of the war. The war has inspired among Mr. Bush's backers a rally-round-the-flag effect, a redoubling of belief.

They believe in the cause as articulated by the Vice-President, Dick Cheney, this week in his speech at Westminster College in Fulton, Missouri, where Winston Churchill delivered his "iron curtain" oration. "You and I are living in such a time" of the "gravest of threats," said Mr. Cheney. Once again, he explained the motive for the Iraq war, implicitly conflating Saddam Hussein with the Al-Qaeda and oblivious to the failure to discover weapons of mass destruction (WMD). "His regime cultivated ties to terror," he said, "and had built, possessed and used weapons of mass destruction." And Saddam "would still be in power," he continued, coming to the point of his allegory, if John Kerry, cast as Neville Chamberlain to Mr. Bush's Churchill, had had his way.

These misperceptions are pillars of Mr. Bush's support, according to a study by the University of Maryland: 57 per cent of those surveyed "believe that before the war Iraq was providing substantial support to Al-Qaeda," and 45 per cent "believe that evidence that Iraq was supporting Al-Qaeda has been found." Moreover, 65 per cent believe that "experts" have confirmed that Iraq had WMD.

Among those who perceived experts as saying that Iraq had WMD, 72 per cent said they would vote for Mr. Bush and 23 per cent for Mr. Kerry. Among those who perceived experts as saying that Iraq had supported the Al-Qaeda, 62 per cent said they would vote for Mr. Bush and 36 per cent for Mr. Kerry. The reason given by respondents for their views was that they had heard these claims from the Bush administration.

These political pulp fictions are believed out of faith and fear. This is a classic case study in "the will to believe," as the American philosopher, William James, called it. The greater insecurity would be not to believe Mr. Bush. It would mean the President had lied on issues of national security. And how could the Iraq war be seen as a pure, moral choice once good had been shown to be false? The idea of proof has shifted from fact to fervour.

The attack lines against Mr. Kerry are that he is an opponent of national security and un-American. When Mr. Kerry committed the gaffe of uttering the truth that many world leaders secretly hope for his victory, he provided the Bush campaign with an opening. The Secretary of Commerce, Donald Evans, has repeatedly said that Mr. Kerry "looks French." The Republican House majority leader, Tom DeLay, begins every speech: "As John Kerry would say, bonjour."

The European mission this month of Senator Joseph Biden, a Democrat on the Foreign Relations committee, is a telling if overlooked footnote to the campaign xenophobia. After meetings with Jacques Chirac and at Downing Street (Tony Blair's London home), he learned first-hand of the Bush administration's almost complete lack of consultation. Mr. Chirac offered first steps toward French assistance in Iraq, and Mr. Biden wrote a letter spelling them out to Mr. Bush, who referred him to the National Security Adviser, Condoleezza Rice, who in turn politely listened and never responded.

Meanwhile, the Republican chairman of the committee, Senator Richard Lugar, who has been granted just one meeting in the past year with the President, remarked to negligible press notice: "The diplomacy is deficient. By that I simply mean not many people agree with us, or like us, or are prepared to work with us. That will really have to change."

The brazen smears about Mr. Kerry's wounds and medals, his voting record on military programmes as a Senator, and his loyalty, have been communicated by the Bush-Cheney campaign through an estimated $50 million in TV and radio advertising in less than 60 days in 17 swing States. This storm of unremitting negativity has bolstered the faith of his supporters, and has managed to maintain the contest at a draw.

The attacks against Mr. Kerry are a bodyguard of lies to protect the original ones who are the Praetorian guard of Mr. Bush's presidency. - Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004.

(Sidney Blumenthal is former senior adviser to President Clinton and Washington bureau chief of Salon.com)

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

News Update

Stories in this Section

WTO STRIKE AGAINST FARM SUBSIDIES

THE CRISIS IN NEPAL

"Continuity in India-Sri Lanka ties"

Fiction's triumph over truth