The U.S. position is that the coalition-approved Governing Council in Iraq will not be ready for some time to take over running the country. Chalabi, one of its members, ostensibly contradicted this when he said recently that Iraq is ready for greater political and economic power.
What Chalabi said sounded very much like what the French were saying. And if the French were for it how could the U.S. agree? Could the U.S., the most powerful nation on earth, admit that it is wrong and the French - of all people! - are right? Impossible!
No! the embarrassment for Bush would be too great. As a matter of fact, Bush was angry that a guy like Chalabi could contradict him. After all the U.S. has done for Chalabi? Bush dispatched Condoleezza Rice to tell Chalabi directly that he should not embarrass the president.
Macho Bush does not like anyone having an opinion different from his. This after he has made speech after speech about the great democracy he was going to install in Iraq. Democracy and free speech, yes. But contradicting Bush, NO!
Rice told Chalabi that no one wants to help Iraq more than Bush. Therefore, Chalabi should tone down his remarks. Can you imagine such arrogance? Bush is more eager for reconstruction of Iraq than Chalabi, an Iraqi leader? I hold no brief for Chalabi, but as an Iraqi working for years to help his country it is obvious for anyone to see that Chalabi's interest is stronger. By far.
Bush, as a great competitor, is being stubborn. Iraqi occupation must go as he says. Even Kofi Annan said that either the UN has a leading role or no role at all. The UN should not be the servant of the U.S. In defiance of Bush, he agreed with the French position and the Chalabi position that there should be a shift to Iraqi sovereignty soon.
I wonder if Condoleezza Rice will tell Annan that he, too, should not embarrass Bush?
Oh, how I wish for a little humility from Bush. He promised humility when he was a candidate. But All I see now, that he is president, is disdain, for friend and foe alike.
