Four More Years – What Will Be the Legacy of Bush’s America?

George W Bush, it is widely accepted, is not the sharpest tool in the box, but in a nation of tools he is certainly the most powerful. He was re-elected on November 2nd after a campaign fought on neo-Christian values at home and the war on terror overseas, and although he may have won over a slim majority of his country-folk the rest of the world is understandably concerned. After the first four years, and with his new mandate, it is clear that the world after Bush’s presidency will be a very different one to the one he inherited from Bill Clinton. Many areas stand to be profoundly affected; not least the Middle East, but also the American economy, Supreme Court, and the ties the US has with the UN and the ever-expanding European Union. There are doomsayers who would have you believe that the apocalypse is nigh, but realistically, can it be that bad?

Let us start with the obvious: the effects on the nations already feeling the brunt of Bush’s war machine: Iraq and Afghanistan. They could realistically be entering a tremendously long period of political turmoil and insecurity. They will have to get used to the sight of troops from the US and Britain, and the UN no doubt, being present for years if not decades to come. The worst case scenario could well be large scale civil war between Islamic fundamentalist and nationalists on one side and those who support western-style democracy on the other – with an enormous refereeing commitment from the US, Britain and the international community.

With the resignation of Colin Powell, one of the few moderate, if futile, voices within the Republican ranks, and with his replacement, Condoleeza Rice, towing Bush’s neo-con party line it looks unlikely that the war on terror will stop at Iraq’s borders. So, who next? Iran, Syria and North Korea spring to mind – the latter of which brings the genuine possibility of large-scale war. There is also the revitalised Chinese to think about, with their economy expanding at an exponential rate and well over a billion of the world’s inhabitants at the disposal of the single-party government. Were they to throw their weight behind the North Koreans things could get very ugly. This is an extreme scenario of course, and there is the possibility of a positive outcome to the conflicts. There is a chance that Bush and Blair’s crusades into the Middle East will result in free democratic governments being installed across the region. It may take years of bloody conflict to get there but the effects would not be short term – barring nuclear fallout we could be looking at a legacy of freedom that could last for centuries, and that would be a remarkable achievement and an enormous long lasting force for good. Regardless of Dubya’s motives and tactics the end could (whisper it) justify the means.

It is also not unrealistic to foresee a resolution to the Israel-Palestine conflict in the next four years, with the death of Yasser Arafat possibly hastening peace talks on both sides and the very real prospect of a Palestinian state being set up under Bush’s watch. What a legacy Bush could walk away with – a Palestinian state and a democratic Middle East free of tyrannical self-serving regimes. John Kerry, all this was so nearly yours.

The Middle East may be Bush’s major foreign policy concern, but it is not his only one. Unless he intends to sow the seeds of serious detachment from the United Nations and the future superpower that is the European Union (if it doesn’t collapse under the weight of its own constitution) he has a lot of bridges to rebuild. He has expressed an interest in doing so, and of course Tony will do his darndest to convince Europe that big George is alright deep down, but his trigger happy approach to conflict resolution and his reluctance to comply with anti-global warming measures could prove to be major obstacles. That and the French have never forgiven them for Euro Disney.

Bush’s legacy on his own soil is also very worrying. In his first four years he managed to turn the surplus of the Clinton administration into a dramatic deficit, largely the result of introducing tax breaks for the country’s top earners coupled with massive military spending. Neither of these factors is likely to change in the next four years and the state of America’s future finances looks dire. They could be heading for a recession that would have serious consequences around the world. However, the economy isn’t what got Bush elected on the home front. After spending millions playing on middle America’s pseudo-Christian moral ‘values’ the future also looks grim for America’s pro-choice and gay rights campaigners, and the effects of this could have ramifications well beyond the next four years. In that time Bush will have the opportunity of nominating at least one, but possibly as many as four, Supreme Court Justices. If he fills these seats with right wing Christian conservatives the American right could have significant influence in the Supreme Court for the foreseeable future. This could set back the causes of stem cell research and gay marriage (to name but two liberal concerns) much more than four years. America, who in the latter 20th century at least, has been at the forefront of scientific progress and equal rights could become retrogressive and be left behind by the advancing Eurasians. How long before we find political refugees flooding in from the States in search of freedom and the ‘European Dream’?

Again I am doomsaying, and there is a chance that Bush will not fill as many as four seats, or that the Americans will vote in a Democrat or a moderate Republican to follow Bush. For now though we live in extreme times, with an extreme President who seems set on an extreme course of actions, we can only speculate as to the possible legacy George W. Bush will leave, but it is clear that the course of history will be profoundly affected by his eight years in office.

By Philip Reilly