Who gives the "wrong signal": Commentary

US State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said at a press conference in Washington on July 14 that the United States is rather disappointed at the Philippines' troop withdrawal from Iraq, calling it a "wrong signal" sent to terrorists. The spokesman's remark is thought-provoking.

Iraqi militants kidnapped a Philippine truck driver on July 8, calling on the Philippines to pull troops out of Iraq before the due date, saying otherwise they would kill the hostage. The Philippine's 51 military staff members had planned to begin returning home on August 20, but after the government declared immediate withdrawal on July 14, the number of staff dropped to 43 on the same day.

Of course, the Iraqi militants' act of beheading foreign hostages or the threat of cutting off the head should be condemned. But the Philippine's decision, made in line with its national interests after much consideration in the face of hostage crisis, also deserves understanding because it is an internal affair of the country. The United States, which has been used to arrogantly ordering others about in international relations, couldn't help uttering irresponsible remarks about another country's affairs this time, this is really disappointing.

Boucher said on the same occasion that what's important is to fight against terrorists bravely, "rather than allowing the terrorists to change our actions". This sounds plausible, but an in-depth probe into it reveals that it is untenable. The United States launched the Iraq war under a trumped-up charge that left behind many after-effects, one of the evil consequences is the "brave" creation of more "terrorists". In the extremely bloody turmoil, the United States realized the difficulty in "fighting against terrorists bravely" all by itself, so it tried to draw more other countries into the "brave fight against terrorists". The repeated occurrence of the "intelligence gate" and other scandals made it clear to the world that the United States and Britain sent "wrong signals" to the entire international community from the very beginning. The war launched against Iraq shook morality to its very foundation and the pullout of troops from Iraq by Spain and some other countries has kept revealing the domino effect. Amidst a string of terrorist explosions, even the United States mysteriously handed over power to Iraq two days ahead of schedule, failing to keep what it said "not allowing the terrorists to change our actions".

On the Iraq issue, the US accusing other countries of "sending wrong signals" is really ironical. In a short period of over one year, how many "wrong signals" the US government has advertently and inadvertently sent to the world, from playing up Iraqi's possession of weapons of mass destruction, to accusing the former Iraqi regime of having links with the Al-Qaeda network? On July 12 army private 21-year-old Lynndie England attended a preliminary hearing for 19 charges including prisoner abuse in Iraq. Isn't it another wrong signal sent to the world if the United States only put soldiers like Lynndie England to court but fail to investigate into the root of the scandal?

By People's Daily Online