Reactions to Bush's latest speech on Iraq were largely sceptical, both at home and abroad, given that realities on the ground, not rosy words, will determine the country's future, Khaled Dawoud reports from Washington A 33-minute address to army officers and soldiers on Monday and a series of forthcoming speeches leading up to the 30 June hand over of sovereignty to Iraqis are unlikely to instil confidence among Americans and the rest of the world that US President George W Bush can actually accomplish his detailed plans, US analysts and observers agreed. Reacting to his latest speech, Democratic opponents, members of his own Republican Party and the majority of leading US newspapers and television networks pointed out that Bush's attempt to project confidence would not alter the fact that he now faces a serious credibility problem, clearly reflected in recent opinion polls in which his overall approval rating dropped to an unprecedented low. With many of his earlier promises ahead of Iraq's occupation 16 months ago proven wrong or misleading, there is no reason to trust new pledges, particularly as realities on the ground deteriorate. The extremely volatile situation on the ground, ongoing attacks against US troops, new scandals on the torture of Iraqi prisoners, flack following Bush's announcement that he would not reduce the number of troops, but even increase their numbers if necessary, and tough negotiations at the United Nations to agree a new Security Council resolution on Iraq's future are but some of the challenges that the US president has to surmount before claiming to be out of the woods. Facing all these difficulties, the same US president who once coined the motto "you are either with us, or with the enemy" has had no choice but to become slightly more humble, while nonetheless unwilling to admit that his administration has committed major blunders in planning for the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Nor does it seem likely any time soon that Bush will submit to question whether this war was necessary in the first place. The White House announced on Tuesday that President Bush spoke by phone to French President Jacques Chirac, once dubbed as an enemy equal to Saddam Hussein in off the record statements by senior US officials, particularly in Vice President Dick Cheney's office and at the Pentagon. The aim was to win French approval for the joint US-British resolution on Iraq at the Security Council offering to give the international body a larger role in running the occupied nation until sovereignty is turned to Iraqis. White House officials said that the Bush administration would continue efforts to build international support in the upcoming summits of the G8 leaders and NATO alliance. However, while Bush was seeking to fix damaged ties with "old Europe", lost by his unilateral policies, he faced an unexpected and embarrassing dispute with his closest ally, British Prime Minister Tony Blair. US officials insist that the occupation troops in Iraq will have the final say over any future military operations, regardless of the existence of the newly created, so-called "fully sovereign" Iraqi government. But Blair said that the newly created body should maintain a veto power, and that any major military operations, such as attacks on the town of Fallujah, have to gain its consent. A senior US administration official took issue with Blair's remarks. "Obviously, consent is important. But look, we know how to do this and I really don't think that hypotheticals are very helpful," the official told the Associated Press. US officials said the issue over who has the final word on the activities of US-led coalition troops after sovereignty is transferred would be the first addressed by the United States and members of the interim government once its leaders are named. The administration official said the list of names for the interim government had been narrowed, and might be declared before the end of this week. A letter annexed to the resolution the US and Britain hope to pass at the Security Council will outline the conditions for "cooperation" between the new Iraqi government and US troops, US officials said. The draft resolution does not specify how much say Iraq's new government will have over foreign and Iraqi forces, nor does it set a timetable for US forces to depart. Chirac's office said the French president told Bush in their conversation on Tuesday that the degree of Iraqi control over security and the nation's vast oil reserves "must be studied closely". Domestically, reactions to Bush's speech were largely negative, stating that it carried nothing new, except for his announcement of the plan to destroy the notorious Abu Ghraib prison which became a symbol of torture and mistreatment under the ousted Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein and the occupation. In editorials and commentaries, the general line was that Bush was trying to launch a new beginning in Iraq by declaring that he would destroy Abu Ghraib, but that was difficult to do before answering first why many of his earlier pledges turned out to be untrue, or admitting that the torture incidents reflected the failure of the entire system and not only a small number of soldiers. Democratic rival for the presidential post, John Kerry, said Bush's speech broke no new ground and "what's most important now is to turn these words into action by offering presidential leadership to the nation and to the world. That's going to require the president to genuinely reach out to our allies so the United States doesn't have to continue to go it alone and to create the stability necessary to allow the people of Iraq to move forward." The negative reaction to Monday's speech came as Bush's public approval ratings have sunk to new lows five months before the November elections, according to an opinion poll published in The Washington Post on Tuesday. Fifty per cent of Americans surveyed disapproved of the job Bush was doing overall, with 47 per cent approving his performance -- the lowest overall figure recorded by Washington Post -ABC News polls since the Republican president took office. Additionally, only four of every 10 Americans surveyed gave Bush positive marks for his handling of Iraq, the lowest number since the start of the war in March of last year, according to the poll. Another new CBS News poll showed that 61 per cent of Americans disapprove of the president's handling of Iraq. "I have a feeling this speech was very disappointing to official Washington," said CBS News political consultant Craig Crawford. "He is setting dates and timetables without being clear on how those things get done. The president will get an initial boom from a lot of voters who are not paying that close attention, but as time goes by I think it will become clear the president is laying out a lot of goals, but not how to get there," Crawford said. Such evaluations are definitely not good news for Bush in an election year. (see pp. 8&9)
