bush195_1
Image

In the wake of the Super Tuesday primary elections on Feb. 5, the field of candidates for the 2008 presidential nominations has been clearly defined. The contest for the Democratic nomination has been reduced to two, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, either of whom would break with historical precedent—one as the first woman, the others as the first African-American elected to the presidency. On the Republican side, John McCain appears to be well on his way to his party’s nomination, after his campaign had been declared dead in the water by our national pundits several months ago. None of the candidates for the Republican nomination identified his cause with the incumbent president, a point made embarrassingly clear when Mitt Romney declared that he would continue the legacy of George H. W. Bush, the incumbent’s father.

But what will be or could be the presidential legacy of George W. Bush? It is safe to say that President Bush began his first term in January 2001 without a strong mandate. An intervention by the Supreme Court had resolved the most prolonged presidential election process in U.S. history, and the defeated candidate, former Vice President Al Gore, had actually won the popular vote. The new president’s agenda was appropriately modest; he would conduct, he promised, a “more humble” foreign policy, resisting the temptation to engage in nation-building elsewhere in the world. But the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, abruptly shattered that placid projection. Declaring a “war on terror,” President Bush launched retaliatory strikes on Taliban strongholds in Afghanistan that October, a campaign supported by an international community that was still expressing solidarity with the victims of the Sept. 11 attacks.

A year later, however, as the Bush administration attempted to rally support for a pre-emptive attack on Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq, the response from long-time international allies was negative. With little support from the international community and over the objections of Pope John Paul II and other religious leaders, the United States invaded Iraq in March 2003, with little understanding of the challenge that postwar reconstruction would pose. It was a blunder of historic proportions. The war of choice in Iraq was not a necessary step in the campaign against terrorism but a costly distraction from that campaign. Five years later, the challenge of reducing the U.S. military presence in Iraq while discharging our responsibilities to the Iraqi people will be a painful dilemma for Mr. Bush’s successor, whether Republican or Democrat.

Preoccupation with the tragedy of Iraq, however, should not prevent recognition of the positive initiatives of the George W. Bush administration. Principal among these has been the This article appears in February 25 2008.