Rumsfeld will be a scapegoat?

Members of Congress of the US want Bush to fire Rumsfeld.

The current American administration is under heavy criticism. After the flood of bad news on failures in Iraq, it could not be otherwise. George Bush answered to this by accusing American mass-media in "distortion of the information". He claims that newspapers and television report losses and failures in the first place, but not successes of the establishing new Iraq democracy.

Meanwhile, democratic part of Congress began another attack on the White House. They published a resolution, which orders George Bush to resign the Pentagon Chief, Donald Rumsfeld. As Charles Rangel said, "this resolution gives an official status to the position of many congressmen, who believe that both American soldiers in Iraq and American foreign policy will only benefit if Rumsfeld would leave." Those who support the resolution want to "express openly what many politicians already know: the first step towards returning out troops home is sending home Rumsfeld"

The resolution points out that Pentagon chief lead American public to wrong evaluation of the results of progress of the military and occupation campaigns in Iraq. Another point voiced is that he sent troops to Iraq "without adequate planning or reasonable equipment".

It is not the first time when Rumsfeld is being under fire, especially for his Iraq actions. However it is unlikely that the current resolution will make George Bush fire Pentagon chief. The White House would more likely use it as another means in the on-going president campaign. It is not to forget also that Rumsfeld is one of those who stand behind preventive strikes doctrine, willingly supported by the president.

Criticism of "inadequate planning" is also not fully justified. Pentagon officials close to the chief claim that Rumsfeld himself planned the military campaign by near minute, and for problems after the war it is not only him who is in charge.

So there is no reason to hope that "the most dangerous man on Earth" (as The Times called Rumsfeld once) will be sacrificed to democrats. To do so, the administration has to confess that all the US foreign policy of the last three years was a mistake. Meanwhile, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are still being praised by the White House as great victories in a fight against international terrorism.

Rumsfeld resignation thus would hurt Bush's prestige right before the elections. It is possible, however, that if  situation in Iraq becomes a way too bad, a scapegoat would have to be found. It can be an official of a rank lower than Rumsfeld, who has between all his regalia an old-time friendship of the George Bush, Sr.