THE ELECTIONS: ANALYSIS, CHALLENGE AND HOPE

Thank God for this election. The majority of voters opposed the policies of this tyrannical
regime. They have withdrawn their consent. They have rejected the politics of fear promoted by
this administration, the politics that says “trust us and we’ll protect you from the hordes invading
our country.” This was not a vote for the Democrats because they virtually have no program of
their own. Or it could be said they have a program that differs very little from the program of the
Bush administration.

THE WAR
In many ways, the war was not up for a vote -- as least in the ways most people think. For
months, the US military and other major voices in the imperialist foreign policy establishment --
including many democrats -- mounted a harsh criticism of the deteriorating situation in Iraq.

The Bush team had thought they’d quickly be able to turn Iraq into a pro-US client state, a
platform for further aggression in the region, and a signal to the world that US power was
unchallengeable. Instead, US forces have been unable to either quell the growing insurgency or
cobble together a new Iraqi  ruling class with the power, cohesion and legitimacy to stabilize the
situation. All this has the potential to turn Iraq into a center of anti-US hatred and instability,
further strengthen Iran, destabilize the region, weaken the US military, and open the door for
rival powers. In short, exactly the opposite of what Bush and company set out to accomplish.

This caused forces within the ruling class to maneuver to force Bush to adjust his strategy. These
forces want to salvage what is possible from Iraq in order to maintain U.S. military, political, and
economic domination over the Middle East. They are not aiming for an immediate end to the war
but instead for a shift in tactics. They are not questioning the morality or justness of the war,
merely its execution. The Fall of Donald Rumsfeld is but an indication that Bush recognizes this
reality.

THE DEMOCRATS
The Democrats’ call for a “new direction” and “competent” leadership in Iraq and their criticisms
of Bush’s “failed policy” served these objectives. The Democratic denunciations of the war were
vague. Few candidates spelled out specifically what they would do, and fewer still called for
immediate withdrawal. Some called the war a “mistake,” but none called it what it actually is:
criminal and immoral.

Even Rep. John Muerta’s 2005 call  for troop withdrawal contained the strategy of positioning
US forces “over the horizon”. What this really means is keeping US forces nearby, ready to
intervene at a moments notice to ensure US interests. The fourteen permanent US bases in Iraq
will be part of that plan. (See http://www.fcnl.org/iraq/bases.htm)To ensure a compliant Iraq,
many are even calling for another US-backed, strong-man” to rule Iraq like Saddam Hussein did
in the past.(See the photo of Donald Rumsfeld, then special envoy of President Reagan, shaking
hands with Hussein in Baghdad on December 20, 1983 at
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/)

For these reasons, the democrats will continue to support funding for this war – which has
already consumed well over $300 Billion which should have been used for healthcare, etc. –
under the rubric of ensuring the safety of US troops. “ I’m going to make sure [our soldiers] have
all the equipment and supplies they need to be safe and come home safe,” democratic leader Sen.
Durbin told National Public Radio three days after the elections.

COOPERATING WITH CRIMINALS
The new speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, has assured all that she will not pursue
impeachment or other charges of criminal wrong doing of the Bush administration despite the
war of aggression against Iraq, widespread torture and secret prisons. Instead she called for
“civility and cooperation.” Nor did she  speak of the need to repeal the Military Commissions
Act of 2006 that revoked habeas corpus and legalized torture. She didn’t decry the unending
death and destruction that is daily terrorizing the people of Iraq. She did not pledge to stand
firmly against the new war being conducted /  prepared against Iran.

On a Jon Stewart’s Daily Show the day after the election, Howard Dean said bluntly, “I know
half the audience wants us to impeach the President and all that kind of stuff,” at which point he
was interrupted with cheers, but then he continued, “but we’re not going to do  that.” Instead, he
bragged that the Democrats had won one third of the white Evangelical Christian vote.

DEMOCRAT GOALS
Dean, Pelosi  and other Democrats have several goals as they  look toward the 2008 presidential
election.

First, they wish to  keep their base of voters firmly in check. Remember, the Democrats have
consistently voted for and supported the Iraq war and continue to support its broad objectives.
For this reason, the Democrats second goal is to divert the broad anti-war anger into a framework
that doesn’t question the whole nature of the war.

Third, Democrats wish to give themselves  the flexibility to join into a “bipartisan consensus” to
“adjust,” rather than end, the war. Indeed, “neocon” William Kristol said on FOX News that the
Republican defeat could actually give Bush the political cover to put more pressure on the Iraqi
government and to call for some sort of regional conference (both Democratic demands), while
also increasing the number of troops (which Kristol and other Republican forces like McCain
favor).

The 2006 elections, therefore, by themselves, do not signal a fundamental reversal of course on
Iraq, still less a repudiation of the logic that led to the invasion.

CHALLENGE AND HOPE
A new wind is blowing. As mentioned in the beginning of this Bulletin, voters are no longer
being controlled by the Bush regime’s politics of fear, but they need to find ways to channel their
rejection of this regime in ways other than the electoral process.

It is our duty, as citizens of this country and the world, to withdraw consent and resist this
madness. For inspiration, we only need look at the demise of the Soviet Union. Or the nonviolent
mass movement which drove out the government of Czechoslovakia in 1989 in what was called
the “Velvet Revolution.” Or the nonviolent protest of hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of
Bolivian peasants who shut down that country, changed government economic policies which
hurt the poor, and drove out its corrupt government. Or today, by the fact that millions of sisters
and brothers around the world have taken heart by our repudiation of the Bush regime.

On September 11, 1906, Mahatma Gandhi launched the modern nonviolence movement. On that
day, one century ago, a gathering of 3000 Indians in Johannesburg, South Africa, joined Gandhi
in challenging the oppressive laws of that country with nonviolent civil disobedience. We now
have the opportunity to join with that long tradition of nonviolent rebellion in mass, nonviolent
protest against this criminal and immoral Bush regime. Now is the time for us to act.

ACTIONS
1. Start a peace vigil in your area using the leaflets provided by 8th Day Center at
http://www.8thdaycenter.org/resources/leaflets.html Space is provided for local contact info.

2. Visit these web sites: The World Can’t Wait http://www.worldcantwait.org
and School of Americas Watch http://www.soaw.org Pax Chsisti-USA http://www.paxchristiUSA.org/

3. Share and discuss this leaflet with family, friends, coworkers and your faith community.