And now ... 4 more years of war?

Frightened at the possibility of further terrorist attacks, obsessed with security yet drunk with its immense power, America is enraged beyond reason that its puny enemies have dared strike at its once inviolable homeland. It does not want a dialogue with these enemies, still less a negotiation. It does not recognise that they have any legitimate grievance. It wants them destroyed. And it believes Bush is the man to do it.

There is another major reason for Bush's victory, and it lies in the belief of many Americans that God is on his side - a conviction Bush, a born-again Christian, has not hesitated to proclaim. His sense of divine mission is typical of the religious mindset which now characterises much of America - its vast rural communities rather than its secular cities.

Christian fundamentalism - belief in the Bible as the literal word of God - is one manifestation of the slide toward conservative values which has taken place in America over recent decades and which has resulted in opposition to abortion, gay marriage and stem-cell research. In his campaign, Bush has exploited these socially divisive issues as he has America's fear of terrorist attack.

The world must now come to terms not just with the Bush they have known, ridiculed and hated over the past four years, the Bush they hoped would be defeated, but with a far stronger Bush, whose Republican party controls all three branches of government - the presidency, the Congress (where he has a comfortable majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate) and, more ominously for civil rights, the Supreme Court.

Rather than the traditional balance of power between the White House and the Congress, a balance which would usually require negotiation and accommodation to get legislation passed, America has one-party control of its national government.

How will a victorious Bush behave? Some optimists believe that, at home, he will moderate his right-wing views and reach out to the Democrats in a bid to unify a deeply divided nation. The same optimists believe that, abroad, he will seek to heal the transatlantic rift and ease America's strained relations with France and Germany, the main critics of his Iraq war.

Some even go so far as to recall that Bush himself at one time called for a Palestinian state. Freed from the need to court the Jewish vote, might he not now relaunch the moribund Middle East peace process and pressure Israel to start serious negotiations with the Palestinians?

All this is highly unlikely. Even if Bush were inclined to correct his aim - of which there is no sign - he would probably be prevented from doing so by Vice President Dick Cheney, the strongman of his administration. Whatever changes Bush may make in his Cabinet, the hard-line Cheney is an immovable fixture.

A more likely outcome is that Bush's personal triumph - including his large share of the popular vote - will convince him that he has been "chosen" to implement an unashamedly ideological agenda. This will mean turning back the clock on environmental protection, health insurance and other socially progressive issues at home, while continuing to pursue a tough unilateralist foreign policy, reliant principally on military force.

This is good news for some, bad news for others.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon have made no secret of their support for Bush. They will be jubilant at his re-election. Unlike the Democrats, Bush has not criticised Putin for his criminal repression of Chechnya and for his increasingly authoritarian style of government. Nor has Bush criticised Sharon for his equally criminal repression of the Palestinians. Israel killed 165 Palestinians last month, many of them civilians.

The new orthodoxy - repeated on Nov. 3 by Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom in an article in the French daily, Le Monde - is that the U.S., Russia and Israel are fighting the same Islamic terrorists and must stand together. Shalom included Indonesia and Turkey in the club and called on Europe to join it, seeing that it was, in his words, "equally threatened by the tyranny of terrorism and radical fundamentalism."

Bush's victory is viewed with considerable apprehension in Old Europe, where the call is now for a stronger, more tightly integrated Europe to act as a counterweight to America. The fear is that Bush will persist in his same bankrupt policies, pursuing them even more intensely than before.

In Iraq, this will mean renewed efforts to crush the insurgency by force, including the shelling and aerial bombardment of Fallujah and other cities. If 100,000 Iraqis have already lost their lives since the American invasion in March 2003, how many more will have to die before America comes to its senses? Several European and Arab leaders - including King Abdullah of Jordan, an American ally - believe that the only solution lies in reconstituting the old Iraqi Army under Iraqi command. It is the only institution able to restore security and hold the country together. An essential precondition would be for the U.S. to announce a firm date for the withdrawal of its forces - and keep to it.

The Palestinians have every reason to be deeply concerned at Bush's victory. Even if he were to sack some prominent pro-Sharon ideologues from his team - which is by no means certain as he might even promote them - the right-wing U.S.-Israeli alliance will be as firm as ever.

The U.S. has endorsed Sharon's position that he will not negotiate with the Palestinians until they abandon all resistance, in other words until they surrender. Militant groups like Hamas are unlikely to comply. The bitter struggle is set to continue, with great pain and damage to all sides.

Even more disturbing to international peace is the armed confrontation between the United States and the world-wide Islamic insurgency, of which Osama bin Laden is the symbol, if not the operational commander. He is the archetype of the non-state actors who have emerged because of the inability and unwillingness of Arab regimes to deter or contain both U.S. and Israeli aggression.

There have been many American interpretations of bin Laden's latest video lecture, most of them dismissive. "We are fighting you," bin Laden said, "because you attacked us and continue to attack us. ... You attacked us in Palestine. ...You attacked us in Somalia; you supported the Russian atrocities against us in Chechnya, the Indian oppression against us in Kashmir, and the Jewish aggression against us in Lebanon."

These grievances strike a chord with most Arabs and Muslims.

One phrase escaped the attention of the commentators. Addressing America, bin Laden declared: "We call on you to deal with us and interact with us on the basis of mutual interests and benefits." What is this if not an invitation to negotiate?

A wise American president would heed such calls, revise his policies and seek to make his peace with militant Islam. Not so, George W Bush!

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=5&article_id=9844