The century of Public opinions

Review on Bush and Clinton’s
Discourses for Attacking to Iraq


Just five years was enough for changing American foreign policy since “Iraq Liberation Act” to “War on the terror”! The human Right project which is started from expending democracy and definition of poor Iraqi people, who were in the power of evil dictator, became the definition of all of the World’s people, in the other mean program of attacking Iraq in four days changed to attack in more than four years! “In mid- 1970s, when American Congress instead that U. S foreign policy pay considerable attention to human rights, all administrations have listed human rights among the official priorities of their foreign policy” (Weiss and etc,2004:77), who could believe that claim of Human Right would be a important plea of U. S for considering to the other countries’ affairs?

Bill Clinton was a democrat president of America who is only president between Republican boy and Republican father. Although the difference between Clinton and Bush is more than their political tendency but I think they had common plea for attacking to Iraq, the December 1998 bombing of Iraq (code-named Operation Desert Fox) was a major four-day bombing campaign on Iraqi targets from December 16-December 19, 1998 by the United States and United Kingdom, It was a major flare-up in the Iraq disarmament crisis. The stated goal of the cruise missile and bombing attacks was to "degrade" Saddam Hussein's ability to produce weapons of mass destruction. March 20of 2003, is the date of invasion of Iraq in another time, by United States in the program of Bush “ War on Terror” that is created after 11september and according to his comments one of the elements of “the axis of evil”.

Expanding “American peace” on Iraq has not been done so easy as some politics in USA thought! Yet the conflicts of power were not finished in the country that Clinton and Bush claimed to send Freedom gift for its people. “War Plan Iraq, Ten Reasons against War on Iraq” is the title of Milan Rai’s book who works on the interests of American foreign policy (2002). Milan in this book works on breadth of opposition like the control of oil and some reasons against war like a humanitarian disaster. This is very interesting point that USA who claim to defense human right in the world How cloud be accused of destroying Human right in Iraq? I am to work on the main differences between these two presidents politically for attacking Iraq. The methodology of finding result for this study is discourse analyses.

Power is a main articulation in Clinton’s discourses

Power and human rights discourses were points in Clinton’s speech in november15, 1998 (1), who attributed it in Iraq one month before Iraq Liberation Act. “United Nations Security Council’s” votes for demanding Saddam Hussein reverse course pointed to human rights discourses and finally use of “world opinion” for showing isolation of Iraq from the world, “Iraq must accept” according to “once voice of the world” that Clinton addressed to it, are pointed to the power discourse that USA is representative of the world.

Exceptionalism and stereo type also are main point in the Clinton comments that are perceptible easily; Talk about “U.N. Security Council” for giving the relevant resolutions for Iraq problem (its weapons of mass destruction), “our willingness” and “our military” for encouraging importation of US nation in this process, are pointed to American exceptionalism, “its weapons” and “it must accept all weapons of mass destruction-related resolutions”(the forth article of conditions that was enforced to Iraq” are rooted in stereo type of thinking that conducted Clinton in his actions.


The Profit of our Century

In competition of Clinton, The discourse of justice and war are more titled in Bush discourses, in December of 2006(2) Bush in the press conference Bush said that: “This war on terror is the calling of a new generation”, so Bush, when five years is passed from 11September and the fire of War is lighted for it, declared profitably that War on Terror is “Calling for new generation”, and it could be said that this discourse also rooted in American Exceptionalism. In this sentence that bush said it in fifth anniversary of 11 September(3), connection between these two discourses is clear: “With our help, the people of the Middle East are now stepping forward to claim their freedom, from Kabul to Baghdad to Beirut.” I have to add that bush in his previews comments in this speech explained “our help” with the “war”, the tactic “that America must confront threats before” enemies “reach our(Americans) shores”. So in this time in Bush’s discourses American’s interests are important because they are the world’s interests!

From the government to the nations

Maybe differences of these two presidents are came from their times! Or their policy! Or the situation of Middle East! But with attention to analyzing their discourses, I think attention to public opinion is main point for study; I want to say that in bush discourses we see War and Justice together, and this is for nothing just convincing the public opinion! Although in Clinton discourses we have power and human right together but the comments behind of his concepts of human right was UN and it is meant that the governments were more important in Clinton discourses.

So it could be said that attention to public opinion is main difference in between Bush and Clinton for representing their policy. Another point is changing the American policy in this five years, with this findings I can said that American policy is not change in these years, just peoples and their opinion is more regarded and America yet follows his policy with attacks.

References:

1- Rai, M, (2002), War Plan Iraq, Ten Reasons against War on Iraq, London, Verso
2- Weiss, T and etc, ( 2004)Wars on Terrorism and Iraq, Human Rights, Unilateralism, and U.S. Foreign Policy, London, Routledge

Web Sights:

1- http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9811/15/clinton.speech/index.html?eref=sitesearch
2- http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/12/20061220-1.html

3- http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060911-3.html