by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright March 15, 2004
All Rights Reserved.

pain's conservative Prime Minister Jose Maria Anzar's Popular Party and staunch U.S. ally, took on the chin in Sunday's national elections, losing by over 5% to Socialist Party candidate Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero. In the wake of deadly Islamic terrorism, killing 200 and injuring more than 1,500, Spanish voters punished the ruling party, handing stunning victory to critics of U.S. foreign policy. After an eight-year run, Anzar's party was bounced out of office, indirectly blamed for deadly bombings on Spanish soil. Make no bones about it, when Bin Laden—not home grown Basque separatists called ETA—emerged as the likely culprit, Spanish public opinion reacted harshly. Not only did Bin Laden affect Spain's vote, he has changed the political landscape in Europe. More than ever, Europeans show growing disapproval with the Bush Doctrine.

      When Democratic front-runner and likely nominee John F. Kerry said foreign leaders would like to see a “regime change” at the White House, Republicans asked for proof. “Either he is straightforward and states who they are, or the only conclusion one can draw is that he is making it up to attack the president,” said White House spokesman Scott McClellan, demanding Kerry name his sources. Yet, despite McClellan's challenge, it's not rocket science to figure out that Spain's newly elected leader Zapatero, French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder have little affection for the current administration. When President Bush defied U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix and launched preemptive war in Iraq, diplomatic relations headed south. Surely Vice President Dick Cheney isn't that clueless, insisting Kerry mention names.

      Booting out Spain's conservative party and electing a socialist, proves, if nothing else, that Bush had a loyal ally in Aznar. He defied public opinion committing troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. Spain's March 11 Islamic bombings confirmed socialists' worst nightmares that aiding the U.S. invited Islamic terrorism in Spain. Before the attacks, Anzar's conservatives led by 5%. After the bombings, support eroded by 10%, handing Zapatero and socialists the election. “Today the Spanish people have spoken with massive participation. They have said they want a government of change,” said Zapatero, reminding the opposition—and foreign leaders—that Spain's electorate overwhelming rejected Anzar's foreign policy, especially his support for Bush's war. While antagonizing the White House, Kerry stated the obvious, that foreign leaders aren't thrilled with today's U.S. policy.

      Europeans aren't soft on terrorism or trying to interfere with or set U.S. foreign policy. Nor did they disagree with the longstanding U.S. “regime change” policy in Iraq. Yet “regime change” didn't automatically trigger preemptive war. Nor did U.N. Resolution 1441 encourage the use of military force to topple Saddam. U.N. rules draw the line when it comes to international standards—including guidelines for armed conflict. Without meeting specific criteria, the U.N. didn't buy Secretary of State Colin L. Powell's uncorroborated case for preemptive war. Before Tomahawk Cruise Missiles hit Baghdad, the Security Council didn't regard Iraq as a credible threat to U.S. national security. True allies agree-to-disagree without resorting to name-calling or coercion. Members of the Security Council know the U.S. must assess its own threats and act to defends its interests.

      Terrorism on the European continent now becomes a referendum on whether today's U.S. policy made the world safer from terrorists. Judging by the outcome of Spanish elections, the answer is a resounding no. No one in Europe or elsewhere begrudged the U.S. the right to avenge the attacks of Sept. 11. Toppling the Taliban and Saddam didn't turn Europe against the U.S. It was U.S. insistence after the war in monopolizing contracts that turned off so many otherwise tolerant allies. Whether it's France, Germany, Russia or now Spain, allies expect evenhandedness when it comes to sharing economic opportunities. Stubbornly resisting U.N involvement, or, for that matter, relegating the world body to “help with elections,” antagonized governments otherwise friendly to the U.S. Madrid's bombings should remind all parties that a multinational strategy is long overdue.

      Spain's Islamic terrorism sends a loud wakeup call that it's time for a multinational strategy. Iraq's sovereignty involves more that picking its form of government or deciding which leaders should have the loudest voice. So far, Ahmed Chalabi, a key player on Iraq's Governing Council, played a devious role in feeding the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans bad intelligence. CIA Director George J. Tenet made it clear the White House—specifically Cheney—ignored his assessment of prewar intelligence, questioning weapons of mass destruction. Spain's abrupt about face reflects growing discontent with current U.S. foreign policy. Whether Kerry's exaggerating sentiments about foreign leaders is anyone's guess. One thing's for sure: The current U.S. terrorism policy hasn't made Europe a safer place. Maybe it's time to take a good, hard second look.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2002 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.