Pundits are slow to point this out (as they always are) but, I believe historians will correctly link the current events of the "Arab Spring" with the foreign affairs doctrine of President Bush.
Just as President Nixon received positive recognition (post presidency) for opening up the market with China (unfortunately a two-way market) I think Bush's presidency will be judged more favorably because of his views on spreading democracy throughout the world.
I personally don't agree with that philosophy and would much rather see the Ron Paul version of diplomacy but, there is little doubt that the seeds of freedom planted in Iraq have spread to Iran (with little success thus far) but, have taken root in Egypt, Libya and Syria.
Luckily, the Obama administration has, for the most part, tranferred their ownership and leadership in the region to NATO and the United Nations. The Obama's whispers for dictators to step down have had no impact even though citizens and diplomats in those regions have asked for more decisive US leadership.
It will be interesting to see if the mainstream media lets The Obama take full credit for events in the middle east while continuing to blame everyone else for the other areas of ineptitute. Post stablization will also be a decision point to see how many dollars the administration commits to the region. There are many "no-win situations" on that pathway.
Regardless of those issues, the Bush Presidency will be viewed much differently historically especially as more countries move to democracies as we know those will be very slow-moving processes.
Just as President Nixon received positive recognition (post presidency) for opening up the market with China (unfortunately a two-way market) I think Bush's presidency will be judged more favorably because of his views on spreading democracy throughout the world.
I personally don't agree with that philosophy and would much rather see the Ron Paul version of diplomacy but, there is little doubt that the seeds of freedom planted in Iraq have spread to Iran (with little success thus far) but, have taken root in Egypt, Libya and Syria.
Luckily, the Obama administration has, for the most part, tranferred their ownership and leadership in the region to NATO and the United Nations. The Obama's whispers for dictators to step down have had no impact even though citizens and diplomats in those regions have asked for more decisive US leadership.
It will be interesting to see if the mainstream media lets The Obama take full credit for events in the middle east while continuing to blame everyone else for the other areas of ineptitute. Post stablization will also be a decision point to see how many dollars the administration commits to the region. There are many "no-win situations" on that pathway.
Regardless of those issues, the Bush Presidency will be viewed much differently historically especially as more countries move to democracies as we know those will be very slow-moving processes.
