The Shape of Days

The New York Times:

---

Audience Unmoved During Bush’s Address at the U.N.
By STEVEN R. WEISMAN

UNITED NATIONS, Sept. 23 — A president who has led his forces to victory, ostensibly on behalf of the United Nations, would in theory deserve a hero’s welcome. But that was not what President Bush encountered in an icy chamber here today, almost five months after he declared an end to major hostilities in Iraq.

Without apology, Mr. Bush declared that the Security Council had been “right to demand that Iraq destroy its illegal weapons and prove that it had done so” and “right to vow serious consequences if Iraq refused to comply.” The United States, he said, had not only unseated Saddam Hussein but also defended “the credibility of the United Nations.”

But that was not how others, from the secretary general of the United Nations to the French president, saw it. The invasion of Iraq, to them, remained a dangerous act of unilateralism now beset by intractable problems.

The audience of world leaders seemed to perceive an American president weakened by plunging approval ratings at home, facing a tough security situation in Iraq where American soldiers are dying every week, and confronted by the beginnings of a revolt against the American timetable for self-rule by several Iraqi leaders installed by the United States.

Nor did they seem eager to help. If anything, they appeared more skeptical than ever of Mr. Bush’s assertions, including his promise to “reveal the full extent” of illegal weapons programs he says exist in Iraq, and unforthcoming, at least for now, in their response to his appeal for help with the Iraq occupation and reconstruction.

---

The Washington Post goes even further. Note, please, that this article excerpt is not from the op/ed pages. It’s from the front page.

---

A Vague Pitch Leaves Mostly Puzzlement
By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 24, 2003; Page A01

UNITED NATIONS, Sept. 23 — In his speech today to the U.N. General Assembly, President Bush tried to walk a fine line between defending a war deeply unpopular in much of the world and looking for help from reluctant countries to rebuild Iraq. The result left diplomats and lawmakers puzzled about his ultimate intentions.

Bush, in fact, sidestepped direct answers to many of the questions that have arisen since the administration said it would seek a Security Council resolution that would expand the United Nations’ role in Iraq and call on countries to contribute more troops and money. How quickly would the United States grant sovereignty to the Iraqis? Would the administration grant any decision-making role to the United Nations in exchange for its imprimatur? Or does the administration simply want assistance without giving up much in return?

One reason for the vagueness is that U.S. diplomats have discovered in recent weeks that little help is likely to be forthcoming. Secretary General Kofi Annan, deeply disturbed by the bombing attacks on the U.N. mission in Baghdad, has urged a slow and careful review of the organization’s role in Iraq, U.S. and U.N. officials say. The list of countries willing and able to provide troops appears to have dwindled, not increased, and even financially deep-pocketed countries such as Japan have indicated they would not be able to contribute much to the U.S. enterprise in Iraq, U.S. officials said.

“There is a hell of a case of donor fatigue,” a senior administration official said today. “A realistic appraisal [of what a new resolution would bring] is ‘not much.’ “

---

Finally, in contrast to the sky-is-falling chickenlittleism of the Times and the Post, we have the Washington Times.

---

Bush defends U.S. on Saddam ouster
By Joseph Curl
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

NEW YORK — President Bush yesterday fiercely defended his doctrine of pre-emption, saying the ouster of Saddam Hussein at the hands of the U.S.-led coalition saved the credibility of the United Nations, which had failed to act for 12 years.

In an address to the 191-member U.N. General Assembly, the president declared that the United States had made the right decision to go to war and chastised foreign leaders for not following through on a final U.N. Security Council threat of “serious consequences” for Saddam if he failed to disarm.

“The Security Council was right to vow serious consequences if Iraq refused to comply,” Mr. Bush said, referring to the council’s last resolution, 1441. “And because there were consequences, because a coalition of nations acted to defend the peace ‚Äî and the credibility of the United Nations ‚Äî Iraq is free.”

The president took unflinching aim at French President Jacques Chirac and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, both of whom criticized the United States for going to war without an explicit U.N. resolution authorizing the use of military force.

---

It’s gotten to the point where you can’t get the whole story from any one source any more. It’s a shame. I mean, in this example, you’re left with no choice but to wonder if the three reporters even watched the same speech.

• I don’t wanna jinx it, but …
• ‘Drug companies don’t want you to get healthy’
• Monday, only not