Oddly enough, the president used to be fairly responsible when describing al Qaeda’s role in Iraqi violence. Not too terribly long ago, Bush described “the terrorists affiliated with or inspired by al Qaeda” — not even the network itself — as the “smallest” component of violence in Iraq.
And then, as the political winds shifted, so too did the president’s rhetoric. In May, Bush declared that al Qaeda is “public enemy No. 1 in Iraq.” Yesterday, he reiterated the point at the Naval War College, describing al Qaeda as “the main enemy” in Iraq.
The point, obviously, is to shift the political debate. If we’re fighting those who were responsible for 9/11 in Iraq, the argument goes, then we can’t withdraw. As such, al Qaeda is suddenly transformed from minor player in Iraq to the sole purpose for our ongoing presence.
Glenn Greenwald recently had an excellent item explaining that several major media outlets are buying into war supporters’ rhetorical shift. Thankfully, McClatchy demonstrated today that some journalists are still willing to fact-check the president.
Facing eroding support for his Iraq policy, even among Republicans, President Bush on Thursday called al Qaida “the main enemy” in Iraq, an assertion rejected by his administration’s senior intelligence analysts.
The reference, in a major speech at the Naval War College that referred to al Qaida at least 27 times, seemed calculated to use lingering outrage over the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to bolster support for the current buildup of U.S. troops in Iraq, despite evidence that sending more troops hasn’t reduced the violence or sped Iraqi government action on key issues.
Was that so hard?
I realize it seems rather silly to praise a newspaper article for pointing out demonstrable facts about the president’s misleading war rhetoric, but pieces like McClatchy’s seem all-too-rare lately.
Besides, this piece was particularly strong — and detailed.
Bush called al Qaida in Iraq the perpetrator of the worst violence racking that country and said it was the same group that had carried out the Sept. 11 attacks in New York and Washington.
“Al Qaida is the main enemy for Shia, Sunni and Kurds alike,” Bush asserted. “Al Qaida’s responsible for the most sensational killings in Iraq. They’re responsible for the sensational killings on U.S. soil.”
U.S. military and intelligence officials, however, say that Iraqis with ties to al Qaida are only a small fraction of the threat to American troops. The group known as al Qaida in Iraq didn’t exist before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, didn’t pledge its loyalty to al Qaida leader Osama bin Laden until October 2004 and isn’t controlled by bin Laden or his top aides.
This isn’t an example of “bias.” It’s not the “liberal media.” It’s not “unfair.” It’s journalism. Telling people what the president said, and then explaining when the president is wrong, is what reporters are supposed to do.
Retired Major Gen. John Batiste, a former division commander in Iraq turned critic of the war, recently warned everyone about conflating al Qaeda and Iraqi insurgents.
“[W]e cannot attribute all the violence in Iraq to al-Qaeda. There’s a tendency now to lump it all together, and call it al-Qaeda. We have to be very careful with that.”
Unfortunately, the president disagrees, and hopes Americans won’t know the difference. Kudos to McClatchy’s piece for calling him on it.