George Bush: friend or foe?

Hugh Bailey:

It is important to distinguish between the country and the President. The USA was and remains a good and generous friend to Britain and Europe. The President is a right winger from a conservative party, and I disagree with many of his policies: tax cuts for the rich, welfare cuts for the poor, tariffs which stop Sheffield steel being sold in America, putting oil company profits before global warming.

But should we stop talking to the President because we disagree with his policies?

No. It is when you disagree that it is most important to talk. And, as long as Tony Blair is Prime Minister and George Bush is President, negotiations between Britain and America will take place between these two men.

If we were confident that George Bush would always make the right decision whether we spoke to him or not, it would not matter if the talking stopped.

And, if the United States was a small country with few soldiers and no trade with Britain, we could afford to ignore it.

But it is not.

It is the world's only super-power and Britain's biggest trading partner.

One hundred thousand people in Yorkshire depend on American investment or American markets for their livelihood.

Can we ignore this?

It is fair for anti-American protestors, especially those who opposed military action in Iraq, to ask whether talking to America achieves anything.

I think it does, even though we do not always get our way.

Bush came to power promising to cut government spending including American foreign aid, and to take decisions unilaterally in "America's interests" instead of working through international bodies such as the United Nations.

Blair persuaded Bush to increase American aid, and not just to Afghanistan and Iraq. The USA is now the biggest donor combating AIDS in Africa.

Blair persuaded Bush to take his concerns about Iraq to the UN. It did not prevent war, as Blair hoped, but was he wrong to try?

Blair still wants a major role for the UN in post-war Iraq, and Bush is moving in this direction despite opposition from American hawks.

Should Blair stop fighting his corner?

Bush used to talk about an "axis of evil", and even about invading Syria or Iran.

I imagine Blair counselled against this, and we know he persuaded the President to support the "roadmap" to peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

If people in Britain disagree with President Bush's policies they have every right to protest. So do people in America because it is a free country, like Britain.

Let's keep a sense of perspective.

The United States is our ally.

It is not a dictatorship such as Saddam's Iraq, or Soviet Russia.

Talking to President Bush, and through him to America, can only do good.

Chris Fuller:

George Bush's visit to England is no ordinary visit. It is the first state visit by a US president since 1918 and it will cost British tax payers about £5 million. London will be littered with road blocks.

Armed US security personnel will be on our streets, a very apt testimony to a president who refuses to exercise gun control in his own country.

Tony Blair defends the visit saying: "It is exactly the right time..." Bush couldn't agree more because he is facing declining poll ratings at home and desperately needs a photo shoot for next year's presidential election.

It is worth remembering that Bush is not even a democratically elected president.

His campaign chairwoman, Katherine Harris, paid $4 million to remove thousands of mainly black, and mostly Democrat voters, from the electoral role in Florida. As Michael Moore points out in his book Stupid White Men, Bush took power in a coup. It was not just about "hanging chads".

The main reason why millions oppose Bush's visit is of course the illegal war on Iraq.

According to the Medact health organisation 21,000 people have lost their lives as a result of the war.

Acute malnutrition has doubled in the last year. Cluster bombs and depleted uranium weapons will remain a health hazard for years to come and now, amid all the talk of reconstruction, the US has restarted aerial bombardments using 500lb bombs over Tekrit.

Meanwhile, the justifications for war have proven to be lies.

No weapons of mass destruction found. No links between Saddam and al Qaida according to the CIA. No mass welcome for US and British armies.

The world has become a more dangerous place as Tony Blair's own internal reports predicted.

Criticism of George Bush runs far beyond his Iraq policy.

How can anyone trust the man who ripped up the Kyoto protocol to limit greenhouse emissions?

Why should we believe Bush to be a man of peace when he withdrew the US from the 1972 anti ballistic missile treaty and went on to reject an international accord to ban germ warfare?

And how can Bush claim to be a man of justice when he refuses to sign up to the International Criminal Court because US citizens may be prosecuted for war crimes?

Bush is no kinder to his own citizens. In his first year of office an additional 1.3 million Americans were pushed into poverty to bring the total to 32.9 million.

At the same time Bush gave huge handouts to the very rich in the form of tax cuts.

It is unsurprising, therefore, that many US visitors to York signed our Stop Bush petition.

It is not an anti-American people campaign, it is an anti-American government campaign.

Updated: 11:04 Wednesday, November 19, 2003