USA/KUWAIT: PREVIEW TO U.S. PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH'S ANNUAL STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS

Record ID: 838607

  • Title: USA/KUWAIT: PREVIEW TO U.S. PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH'S ANNUAL STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS
  • Date: 29th January 2003
  • Summary: (U1) WASHINGTON, D.C., UNITED STATES (JANUARY 27, 2003) (REUTERS) SV: WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN ARI FLEISCHER WALKING TO LECTERN
  • Embargoed: 13th February 2003 12:00
  • Keywords:
  • Location: WASHINGTON, D.C., UNITED STATES / KUWAITI DESERT, KUWAIT
  • City:
  • Country: Usa Kuwait
  • Topics: International Relations
  • Reuters ID: LVAE51J09E3PX9PKBI7CYG9G0SDZ
  • Aspect Ratio:
  • Story Text: United States President George W. Bush is set to deliver his annual State of the Union address amid softening support domestically and abroad for a military showdown over Baghdad's weapons programme. American presidents have traditionally used the State of the Union to build a consensus domestically. This time, however, it is unclear whether Bush's address will give the president the momentum he needs to prosecute a war.
    U.S. President George W. Bush's speech on Tuesday (January 28) will be seen as one of his most important of his presidency.
    He has been working on the text with his advisers to ensure the message he delivers to the American people is worded such that the public, if summoned to war, embraces his call to arms.
    Domestic legislation and the health of the economy will be featured in this year's address, and undoubtedly will consume as much as half of the president's remarks. But the country and the world will be listening carefully for Bush's language on Iraq.
    Aggressive, patient, or conciliatory -- the world, especially on the heels of the latest United Nations (U.N.) weapons inspectors' report -- will seek some signal of the president's course.
    The world took notice last year when the President surprised many by speaking about his war on terror, singling out North Korea, Iraq, and Iran.
    "States like these, and their terrorist allies constitute an axis of evil arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger," Bush said.
    Heading into the speech, Bush's approval rating is at a strong 58 percent - but down 20 points from his post-September 11 popularity of last year. With support softening, questions are being asked about what the president can say to assuage fears that his campaign against Iraq is ill-founded.
    Carroll Doherty is a surveyor of public opinion at the Pew Center, an independent polling organisation. He says the public is still looking for more information from the Bush administration.
    "I think they need to be a little more aggressive about explaining, being precise about what exactly is the reason for war. I do think that there's this widespread belief in the public that the inspectors were expected to uncover some kind of smoking gun. I'm not sure Iraqi experts would ever say that was possible, or even the administration, but I think the administration needs to state why it is we need to go to war, even if there is no smoking gun," Doherty said.
    A smoking gun was delivered to the United Nations in 1962, when President John F. Kennedy's U.N. ambassador, Adlai Stevenson, produced photos of Soviet missiles in Cuba - rebuffing the Soviets, and leading to the end of the Cuban missile crisis.
    To this point, the Bush administration hasn't publicly provided the United Nations, or the public with photos, satellite images, or other irrefutable evidence that Iraq poses an imminent threat with weapons of mass destruction.
    Still the White House itself recognises Bush must continue to make a case for the prospect of war.
    "The President is not going to be guided by a decision about whether or not to go to war based on polls. The President will be guided by what he views as Commander-in-Chief as necessary to do to protect the American people. Having said that, I think it is also clear that in the event the President does make the determination that it will be necessary to go to war, he will of course make more of a case. I think when you take a look at where the public is, it's interesting because it's even more so than in 1991, the public understands the threat that Saddam Hussein presents. I think the public is supportive of the use of force if, in the judgement of the President, it becomes necessary," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said Monday (January 27).
    Not surprisingly, Bush's political rivals say the President has misguided priorities, and that a war with Iraq could potentially decrease U.S. national security.
    "Will invading Iraq, and taking out Saddam, make America and our friends more secure? If we invade only to depart, leaving an open wound behind us, the suffering will be used by extremists to inflame more hatred, and recruit more terrorists. In the end we could win a war in Iraq, lose a battle against terrorism, and leave America less secure,"
    Daschle warned Monday (January 27).
    For their part, Americans obviously would like to see a change in Iraq, but are concerned with the thought of war.
    "I'm not really sure that he's got anything to disarm of, but I think it would improve the neighbourhood if he would go somewhere else," Arnold Smith said.
    "I think the President is squandering a lot of the momentum in the war against terrorism, and it's going to be really hard to regain that," Toby Gati said.
    "I'd like to hear him say that he's going to wait awhile before he goes to war. I think it's good to put the pressure on, but I think we have to wait," Randy Ivans said.
    While there is concern in the United States and abroad about the road ahead in Iraq, what is certain is that Bush's speech will be listened to very carefully by both supporters, and rivals come Tuesday (January 28) night.
  • Copyright Holder: REUTERS
  • Copyright Notice: (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2015. Open For Restrictions - http://about.reuters.com/fulllegal.asp
  • Usage Terms/Restrictions: None
Register