Anti-U.S. Sentiment Marks U.N. Gathering

Anti-U.S. Sentiment Marks U.N. Gathering

By NICK WADHAMS
The Associated Press
Friday, September 22, 2006; 6:00 PM


UNITED NATIONS -- The hallmark of this year's U.N. General Assembly debate has been the heavy anti-American tone from not only its rivals like Iran and Venezuela, but also a host of more moderate nations, a trend underscoring the United States' troubled image in the world.

One after another, speakers in the General Assembly have lamented a world gone wrong _ renewed turmoil in the Middle East, a wider gap between rich and poor, anxiety about human rights abuses. While the U.S. is not mentioned often, the reference is clear.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, for example, accused powerful nations of failing to solve the Middle East conflict, and argued a more equitable world is in rich nations' interests _ "as long as they do not make the mistake of ignoring the hideous cry of the excluded."

The United States is blamed indirectly for not doing enough to stop Israel's war with Hezbollah in Lebanon, and is seen as spearheading the drive to curb Iran's nuclear program _ a campaign many nations believe is unnecessary. Countries lament the dominance of the U.N. Security Council and seek a greater U.N. role in the fight against terrorism.

"What it boils down to is a sense that the world doesn't believe that the United States is acting in its interest anymore, whereas it used to at a much greater level," said Nancy Soderberg, a deputy U.S. ambassador to the U.N. during the Clinton and Bush administrations.

The issue was thrust to the fore over the first few days of the General Assembly with a string of speeches from leading critics of the United States _ the presidents of Bolivia, Iran, Sudan and Venezuela _ who also riffed on their anger toward America at lengthy news conferences.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez was the most bombastic, outstripping even Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by branding Bush the devil. What surprised many listeners was not necessarily the remarks, which were typical for Chavez, but the applause and titters of laughter that he received in response.

"A few years ago that would have been heard in stony silence," Council of Europe Secretary-General Terry Davis said. "Not because people were afraid to show their agreement, but because they wouldn't have agreed with it. If I was working for the American government, that's what would worry me."

A June poll by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found that America's image in 15 nations dropped sharply in 2006. Less than a third of the people in Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan and Turkey had a favorable view of the United States. According to that poll, America's continuing involvement in Iraq was seen as a worse problem than Iran and its nuclear ambitions.

The anger toward the United States seems itself to reflect a larger concern about the world. There is a sense Mideast turmoil mirrors a wider division between Muslims and the West. Poor nations seem to want a greater say in U.N. reform, where the United States is only one of many nations pushing for change.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan acknowledged those divisions in his speech, saying they were so great they now "threaten the very notion of an international community, upon which this institution stands."

Annan's top deputy, Mark Malloch Brown, said the U.N. chief's staff had wrestled with what message to deliver and decided they must address the somber mood about the state of the world.

"The fact was you could not as secretary-general do anything else but observe that the world looks this year in a pretty sorry state," Malloch Brown said. "That judgment was much more endorsed by all the speeches that followed than we had expected."

U.S. officials said they had taken note of the concern. They dismissed Chavez, who may also have ulterior motives _ Venezuela is seeking a seat on the Security Council, and he can gain political points by standing up to the United States.

"I think that there's perhaps more of an inclination to vent those emotions here because they think they're more likely to get a positive reception," U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said. "But I think that behavior doesn't do them any credit and it certainly doesn't benefit the United Nations."

Experts and diplomats said the trend was worrying particularly because it coincides with American rapprochement with the U.N. and the international community. Washington worked through the Security Council on Iran, North Korea and Lebanon, and dropped its opposition to a major council meeting on Mideast peace process Thursday. Bolton has turned to the council as the best way to stop the violence in Darfur.

While Bush delivered plenty of criticism toward Iran and Syria in his own speech to the General Assembly this year, he omitted the questions about the relevancy of the U.N. and toned down the doubts about whether it could meet the ideals of its founders.

On the first day of the General Assembly, Bush gave a toast in which he called Annan a "decent, honorable man" and thanked him for 10 years of service to "this important body."

That was the kind of praise Annan probably would have rather preferred to get during the height of the Iraq oil-for-food scandal, when the Bush administration kept silent in the face of calls from several U.S. congressmen for his ouster.

washingtonpost