Iraq's PR Battle Continues in U.S., Abroad

By Terry M. Neal
Washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Thursday, December 8, 2005; 11:27 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/08/AR2005120800900_pf.html

President Bush on Wednesday compared the task at hand in the Middle East to the lofty objectives the United States faced during World War II, saying that the attempt to build a stable democracy in Iraq is essential to the future security of America.

Yet, during War World II, Americans and Europeans saw their intervention in clear, altruistic terms. Today, the Bush administration is losing the public relations battle in the Middle East, Europe, and, increasingly, at home. The president seems to realize this and is giving a series of speeches aimed at swinging public opinion back to his side of the ledger.

"In places like Mosul and Najaf, residents are seeing tangible progress in their lives," Bush said Wednesday in a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations. "They're gaining a personal stake in a peaceful future and their confidence in Iraq's democracy is growing. The progress in these cities is being replicated across much of Iraq. And more of Iraq's people are seeing the real benefits that a democratic society can bring."

Democrats were quick to respond, with Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), a longtime hawk on military issues who has turned against the Iraq war, saying that the administration is "unrealistic" about the situation in Iraq.

"When I said we can't win a military victory, it's because the Iraqis have turned against us," he said.

Meanwhile, a new joint poll conducted in six Middle Eastern countries (Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Kuwait and Morocco) by Zogby International and Shibley Telhami, the University of Maryland's Anwar Sadat chair for peace and development, demonstrates the extent of the perception problem facing the United States.

* More than two-thirds of respondents disagreed with the statement that the spread of democracy is the goal of the U.S. in the Middle East.

* More than four-fifths believe the war in Iraq has brought less peace to the Middle East.

* Nearly four-fifths believe the war in Iraq has increased terrorism.

* Just fewer than 60 percent believe the war in Iraq has brought less democracy to the region.

* Seventy-seven percent believe Iraqis are worse off since the war.

* Majorities of the public ascribe to the U.S. negative motivations, such as securing oil resources, protecting Israel and weakening the Muslim world, while fewer than 30 percent ascribe positive motivations, such as preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, promoting human rights and spreading democracy.

If perception is reality in the Middle East, then America has a big problem. Even if the United States wins the ground war, Iraq cannot be a success without winning the PR war as well. Complicating these efforts are revelations about secret CIA prisons in Europe, and prisoner abuse in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. These stories have fanned distrust throughout the Middle East and created an environment in which many people automatically believe the worst about the Bush administration's intentions.

The "consequences of Iraq," said Telhami, are perceptions in the Middle East of "less peace, less democracy, less human rights, less democracy{lcub}hellip{rcub}People there talk about Guantanamo Bay, reports of abuses in Afghanistan, the pictures coming out of Fallujah. People here see it as a tough battle against an insurgency. They see it as an attack on a city where there were a lot of civilian casualties."

Bush administration officials place the blame on what they see as an overtly biased Arab media, feeding off a negative American press corps.

"We've arrived at a strange time in this country where the worst about America and our military seems to so quickly be taken as truth by the press, and reported and spread around the world, often with little context and little scrutiny, let alone correction or accountability after the fact," Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said in a speech this week.

Rumsfeld's argument is a classic "attack the messenger" tactic that government officials in most administrations use to attempt to deflect attention from their own failures and mistakes. Yet it is becoming increasingly clear that the White House's problems are of its own making. An administration previously known for a strong, united voice is now failing to send clear, unambiguous messages about the high standards of American-style democracy.

The net result has undermined the lofty goals Bush set for himself after in his second inaugural address in which he vowed to work aggressively to spread democracy around the globe. Instead, the ambassador for his message, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice , has been distracted from this lofty mission by having to explain over and over again in her foreign travels whether America tortures people.

During World War II, the United States and its allies united the globe in the fight against fascism. So when the president makes the analogy, it begs the question whether we are winning the important battle for the hearts and minds of the people of the Middle East and around the world.

Increasingly, it looks like the answer is no.