As confidence ebbs, will confrontation grow? From Washington, Mohamed El-Sayed Said examines the likely impact of the first anniversary of 11 September Yesterday thousands of American institutions, official and unofficial, from the Presidency and Congress down to the smallest counties in New York and Washington, joined in commemorating the tragic events of 11 September. Yet amid the torrential media coverage the national debate increasingly appears to be pulling in different directions: anger persists, yes, but there are signs that it is being tempered more and more by reason. For a year the US has faced periodic warnings of renewed waves of attacks, feeding the lingering sense of vulnerability the public feels in the face of an elusive, determined and hard to crack enemy. Last Tuesday's warnings by Attorney General John Ashcroft of an unspecified "plan" to attack US targets at home and abroad served to underline the ongoing trauma, as did the Pentagon's announcement that the US is currently on orange -- the second highest -- security alert. Such precautions have contradictory impacts on the American public: if they are intended to announce the vigilance of the administration in protecting its citizens they serve, too, to remind those same citizens that the threat is far from over. Events organised to commemorate 11 September can be read in two ways. Evidence provided by the most recent polls -- The Washington Post and The New York Times /CBS polls published on Monday -- suggests that the psychological and political impacts of 11 September are gradually but steadily fading. The American public, it appears, are determined that their lives return to normal, one of the consequences of which is the authorities' down-sizing of the crowds commemorative events are expected to attract. And while the political impact -- the rally round the president factor -- is still strong, it has been in decline since the immediate aftermath of the tragedy. In both polls the president's approval rating has fallen 30 points from its peak in the low 90s. Satisfaction with the administration's conduct of foreign policy has also fallen, from 68 to 54 per cent in the last two months. Levels of discontent with the federal government are almost back to pre-11 September figures, and both polls revealed increasing concern among respondents over the direction in which the nation appears to be heading. The polls also appear to demonstrate a more sophisticated attitude towards the invasion of Iraq than most administration officials would wish. Yet despite growing reservations Americans remain determined to support the war against terrorism and its corollaries -- tightened restriction on migration from Muslim countries, a general (though declining) support for constraints on civil liberties -- and continue to approve of a military response when the security of the US appears to be challenged. That said, the most recent polls do suggest that the socio-political forces and lobbies that are pushing the current administration further to the right are running counter to the general tenor of public opinion. And while, within the administration, the attack-Iraq scenario is gaining what looks like an irresistible momentum, it remains to be seen how this will play out in the wider, public arena. The signals emerging from Washington -- that the current administration is well on its way to striking its adversaries, and possibly some of its reluctant allies in the Middle East, one by one -- suggest that internal criticism, basically from the traditional main-stream of the Republican Party as well as from liberal media, have yet to be taken on board. And if they are to be accommodated, it is unlikely that that accommodation will extend very far where Iraq is concerned. Most observers expect President George Bush's speech to the General Assembly tomorrow to be his toughest foreign policy statement yet. Pundits predict that the perceived threat from Iraq will be couched in international terms, and that Bush will call for an extraordinarily tough inspection regime, including, possibly, intrusive and protected inspections as an alternative and precondition for abandoning invasion. He may also seek to impose more restrictions on Iraq's international and regional transactions. In this way the president may appear to be bowing to internal and international pressures to give the UN a chance to secure a peaceful resolution of the issue. His language and preconditions, though, are likely to be formulated in such terms as to make the Iraqis feel compelled to reject them. Invasion will then be inevitable. Signs of impending war against Iraq are intensifying as critical elections, to the Congress and other representative offices, get closer. And one consequence of the increased tension felt in the war debate is to distract attention from the acts of remembrance for 11 September. The US -- certainly within the upper echelons of powers -- appears to be drifting away from its war on terrorism and towards more ambiguous and probably more risky wars. Add to this an increasing sense of isolation in the international arena, increasing recognition of the inability to reverse the tide of anti-Americanism around the world -- and one might begin to pinpoint the factors that underline the nascent concerns expressed in opinion polls. For the current administration is patently failing to project America's points of strength, the richness of its culture and contributions to global civilisation, a fact that is being recognised with growing alarm. The danger is that amid so much uncertainty, amid such challenges to its own confidence, Americans will seek solace in confrontation.
