George,

I take issue with the facile phrase "moral clarity" often cited by President Bush’s supporters in the current debate on America’s response to terrorism. Bush’s challenge "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists," sparkles rhetorically but fails as policy.

First, given his administration’s arms length indifference to terrorism in the Middle East prior to 9/11, his rhetoric plays on the international stage more like the bruised ego of a cowboy crowing "Don’t mess with Texas" than as moral perspicacity.

Second, it is a lie. Witness the hypocrisy, born of necessity, of his administration’s own policies. Where is the moral clarity in the ends vs. means calculation that purchased President Musharraf’s support for the war in Afghanistan with debt relief for Pakistan, home of the madrasas which hatched the Taliban? Where is the moral clarity in the soft pedaling of criticism of Saudi Arabia, the birthplace and cultural taproot of al-Qaida? I do not quibble with those particular policies, but rather the counterproductive sanctimony.

Not too long ago, an isolationist candidate Bush decried nation building as contrary to his doctrine of self interest. Now President Bush oversees the rebuilding of Afghanistan and advocates the ultimate interventionist policy of "regime change" in Iraq.

It is painful and embarrassing to watch our President struggling to grasp the moral clarity already shared by the majority of Americans and the rest of the world, which has known the genuine evil terrorism visits upon its victims long before it registered on the radar of the Bush administration.

Fighting terrorists effectively, the bottom line that really counts, requires responsible global citizenship, not sanctimonious unilateralism posing as moral superiority.

Tony Potter, Crozet VA (electronic mail, September 13, 2002)