39 (52)
urged us to go to the issues of American identity and origins in order to understand American
foreign policy and military actions. The Time magazine gave one suggestion to analyze
President George W. Bush’s narrative when it elected President Bush for the person of the year
2004. The Time magazine called him as American Revolutionary in its headline. Indeed,
President Bush has already violently overthrown two governments, from Afghanistan and Iraq.
Being an American, is an ideological commitment that Bush’s narrative represents.
Can then the American Revolution and revolutionary war explain Bush’s narrative in some way?
Where the ‘different kind of war’ narrative may come from? Is the war on terror waged in Iraq a
revolutionary one? My intention here is not to give a certain answer but try to find something
that may explain somehow President Bush’s narrative of the ‘different kind of war’.
In this context, it is possible to play with the ideals of America’s founding fathers and to prac-
tices of the President Bush’s national security policy in Iraq. Specifically the American Revolu-
tion has strong connotation to the current Bush’s narratives as he has said “tyranny must be
challengedâ€. Bush has declared that “all men have same rights not depending where they areâ€
and “regime change†is the must. For Bush “The establishment of a free Iraq at the heart of the
Middle East will be a watershed event in the global democratic revolution.†So far, the Middle
East has been untouchable with Bush’s ‘different kind of war’ practice. (Bush 2003)
Anyhow, if the revolution is about radical change, then Mr. Daalder and Mr. Lindsay are right in
writing that Bush has launched a revolution in American foreign policy. President Bush has re-
defined how America engages the world, and how America sheds the constraints to friends,
allies and international institutions imposing on America’s freedom of action without others such
as UN authorization. But this is why Daalder and Lindsay caution that the Bush’s American
revolution comes with significant risks as it did in the late 18
th
hundred and early 19
th
hundred. It
is actually the opportunity that belongs to the core of the American idea. (Daalder & Lindsay
2003)
On narrative level Bush’s definition that war in Iraq is ‘civilizations fight’ is paradoxical in the light
of revolutionary war. Civilizations fight carries a connotation where the armed forces are fighting
a civilized warfare. There is a story come from American war history when British LTC Tarleton
killed every one of American Colonel Buford’s surrendering men instead of taking them
prisoners. Comparing this experience, anyhow how much simplified, reminds loosely the
‘different kind of war’ narrative where the intention is not to kill the enemy. Instead there are
many prisons inside Iraq where American forces keep Iraqis as prisoners of war, although these
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version
Convention