Bush's Axis of Simplicity

In the State of the Union address last week, President George W. Bush made a surprising statement that lumped the nations of Iraq, Iran and North Korea into a single “axis of evil” that he claims supports and maintains terrorist associations. On Tuesday, his more moderate Secretary of State Colin L. Powell confirmed that Bush’s statement was “not a rhetorical flourish—he meant it.” Powell said the White House intends to pursue an aggressive policy against this so-called “axis of evil” and their “rogue regimes.”

While there is a definite need to pursue terrorism abroad, rhetorically grouping these three distinct countries shows a troubling lack of appreciation for their vastly different histories and current circumstances. The label accomplishes little and may, in fact, hinder attempts to promote reform within North Korea and Iran. Bush’s jingoism is even upsetting our allies; French foreign minister Hubert Védrine yesterday criticized the United States for taking such an antagonistic stance without consulting European powers.

The U.S. must encourage legitimate, existing reform movements rather than build up added antagonism with irresponsible rhetoric. Tensions with North Korea had noticably decreased during the Clinton administration, when an agreement was reached to close and monitor the North’s nuclear facilities. But since Bush has come to office and shown little enthusiam for diplomacy with the North, relations have deteriorated. Bush’s menacing new rhetoric may end any possibility of dialogue or compromise.

Iran, Iraq and North Korea should be dealt with individually, on separate terms according to their separate circumstances. Bush’s “axis of evil” analogy makes little historical sense. The three countries are not aligned, as were the Axis powers of World War II. They are not a united enemy. The American public can fathom the reality of the post-Sept. 11 world and does not benefit from antagonistic, oversimplified rhetoric.

The American public can also do without Bush’s inappropriate injection of the word “evil.” Its theological and emotional connotations unnecessarily heighten already strong feelings on the subject of thwarting terrorism. Bush’s disregard for the sophistication required for dealing with complicated international politics is troubling. Less charged and alienating words would likely serve foreign policy better.

It is not too late for the White House to act wisely. Although Powell has confirmed the administration’s intentions to make America’s diplomatic relations with North Korea, Iran and Iraq a black and white issue, the administration’s campaign will only become legitimate if it considers international concerns in addition to American ones. Damaging rhetoric like “axis of terror” can be mitigated by sound, forward-looking policy. The U.S. must be more open with its allies, for without them, the war on terror has no prospect of success.

Dissent: A Clear Example of Evil

President Bush’s use of “axis of evil” was not an oversimplification because the moral lines of the war on terror are so stark.

Iraq’s dictator, Saddam Hussein, is responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians, unspeakable crimes against countless more Kuwaitis and unprovoked Scud missile attacks against Israel. Iran’s leadership shipped a boatload of arms to Palestinian terrorists and is trying to undermine the caretaker government in Afghanistan. North Korea is the world’s last Stalinist state; its leadership pursues long-range missiles and nuclear weapons as millions face starvation.

While Bush should not push the “axis” countries into each other’s arms, he is absolutely right to put them on notice.

—Andrew P. Winerman ’04 and Paul C. Schultz ’04