Last week a poll was released showing tremendous support for Senator John F. Kerry over incumbent President George W. Bush.  This poll, though, wasn’t of likely, registered, undecided, or even unregistered voters.  In fact, the poll’s participants were not even citizens of the United States, but rather residents of entirely different countries.

According to the poll, as reported by the International Herald Tribune, if the world’s citizenry voted, Kerry would defeat Bush on November 2.  The poll confirms a fundamental fact that every American must remember this election cycle: the world is paying attention, and they don’t like what they see.

Why should Americans care, though?  We are leading the world in the war on terrorism and making every effort to make other countries realize the gravity of the threat faced by every civilization on the planet.  The poll reveals that the world’s dislike of Bush’s foreign policy is the primary reason for their Kerry support.  The University of Maryland’s Program on International Policy Attitudes director, Steven Kull, remarked, “It is rather striking that just one in five people surveyed around the world support the re-election of President Bush.”  It is striking, but their reaction says more about the world than Bush’s foreign policy.

The poll reveals the world’s cowardice, but carefully disguises it behind a hatred of Bush or a belief in the man’s stubbornness or arrogance.  This is an incorrect supposition.  He recognized the threat posed by terrorism and he refused to allow it to fester by attacking the terrorists, bringing the war to their doorstep, and simultaneously putting the rest of the world on notice of the consequences of choosing to side with the terrorists.

The Bush Doctrine is hated because of its simplicity.  In an unwanted war, and in a world where too many countries’ leaders heads are in the sand, simplicity is the last thing people are interested in.  The more complicated and gray they can make a black and white situation, the less likely it is they’ll have to order their armies into war and risk the death of soldiers.  Likewise, a complicated situation is more easily put off than a simple one, but the world’s leadership largely refuses to accept the relative simplicity of the War on Terror.

The world’s favoring of Kerry is a clear demonstration of their hope in a return to Clinton’s complex and malleable foreign policy and the United States, as the muscle, did what it was told to mindlessly and willingly, rather than being the country to take the initiative.  Perhaps a decade ago that was a suitable foreign policy, but in the current war, it could prove disastrous.  Americans should be grateful that the other citizens of the world do not have a say in our presidential politics, because they will naturally favor the candidate more likely to use the vast resources of the United States to first better the lives of the world’s citizens, rather than worrying about the safety, security, and economic vitality of Americans.

The United States is not, and should not be, some tremendous, resource-granting savior.  The world’s citizens do not like being told what to do with the resources that we graciously give to them, but the Bush Doctrine requires an equal amount of effort from those countries that we help.  Afghanistan and Iraq are not being handed a democracy, they are being helped and shown how to build one on their own – a significant difference from the innumerable “instant democracy” wars the United States participated in at the behest of the United Nations throughout Eastern Europe in the Nineties.  Africa is continuing to receive enormous grants for AIDS and hunger relief, but only with strict provisions on its use – a far cry from the block grants dumped into despotic governments with a false hope that they would use it to better their own people’s lives, not the despot’s bottom line.

The world’s preference for Kerry demonstrates a staunch refusal to accept responsibility for their own actions and an effort to return to the good old days in the Clinton era when they got the money and muscle they needed without having to do anything for themselves.

Bush’s foreign policy reflects the conservative beliefs that people must take the initiative to defend themselves against evil, that people are best capable of helping themselves, and that welfare, while necessary, must have restrictions so that the recipients are encouraged to move beyond it.  He believes the United States must help, but it’s about time we offered the resources and assistance on our own terms, not the world’s.

| Main Page | Column Archive | Who Is Brian Clardy? | Files and Links | Feedback |

All written material on this website not attributed to another author is © 2001-2004 by Brian Clardy.
No part of this website may be reproduced in any way without the explicit consent of Brian Clardy.
All rights reserved.