George Bush’S Great America [EN]: Chapter 247

< 246 >

The American election is one of the most significant events globally. What kind of country is America? Isn’t it a nation that effectively holds a dominant position in the world? Of course, this isn’t domination in the traditional sense, but it’s a country that almost always succeeds when it commits to something. Its military power is so immense that even combining all other armed forces globally would barely pose a challenge, and even then, a significant portion of those forces would consist of outdated weaponry and inferior armies.

In other words, while perhaps a bit arrogant to say, it’s not an exaggeration to consider it an election that influences the state of the world. However, this particular election was unique. Well, ‘unique’ might be a strong word. If you examine history, it’s not entirely unprecedented; it’s a phenomenon occasionally observed in the early stages of dictatorships or in newly formed countries.

An election decided before it even begins. Isn’t that absurd?

In China, although not explicitly stated, it was likened to the selection of the Chinese president. The implication was that it was more of a ‘decision’ than an election. China is a communist country, but from its inception, it has been a dictatorship masquerading as a communist state, and the president isn’t elected by the people but chosen by those in power.

The current president, Li Keqiang, maintained silence. This was typical, as he rarely engaged in external diplomacy, except for economic matters. The oriental yellow dragon, which had been gaining momentum and attempting to rise, was suppressed by the eagle’s energy and remained quiet, biding its time, but even this period was aiding its recovery.

Even with the side effects of the treatments and vaccines, they proved sufficient to gradually lift city lockdowns, revitalize dormant factories, and stimulate logistics and the economy. Unlike other countries, the pride of achieving this independently re-united China, which had been on the verge of fragmenting like the Warring States period [a period of disunity in ancient China]. The people once again entrusted their fate entirely to the Party.

Like China, South Korea, its neighbor, also entered a period of recovery. The ‘tainted food’ it had consumed [referring to negative impacts or policies] was more resilient and toxic than anticipated. It had to contend with Super SARS, but it couldn’t halt logistics or production. However, seeking assistance from China made America cautious.

In any case, South Korea also displayed considerable interest in this American presidential election, and the reason was so obvious it hardly needed repeating. However, unlike previous elections, the primary focus wasn’t ‘Which president will be elected?’ but ‘What policies will the re-elected George W. Bush pursue?’

That’s because, in contrast to the early days of his term when he noticeably consolidated power, he was now delegating authority. Was he experiencing some kind of personality shift? Why was he behaving this way? Would you believe it if Prince Yeonsan [a Korean king known for his tyranny], the epitome of ‘wasteful extravagance,’ suddenly reformed and implemented policies surpassing those of King Sejong [a highly respected Korean king known for his wise rule]?

Of course, it wasn’t that Bush was destroying the country or acting like a movie tyrant, but it was widely acknowledged that he had excessively clung to power. However, his accomplishments were so insignificant that they somehow obscured those issues. Originally, obscuring things isn’t that difficult. The sun is larger than the Earth, but to obscure it, all you need is a palm. This is often called ‘covering the eyes,’ but the essence of obscuring is inherently similar.

In any case, unlike his previous term, experts predicted that the next term would involve somewhat different policies, a sentiment echoed by other countries. However, there were minor variations in the specific details of those predictions at an individual level. In South Korea’s case, the primary concern was whether or not to curtail the openly conducted, all-out investment.

In Japan’s case, things remained largely unchanged. In fact, there were too many internal issues to address anything externally. Koizumi, who was re-elected the previous year, suffered a crushing defeat in the House of Councillors election, securing only 49 seats, and his long-term rule began to falter, shaking Koizumi himself.

However, due to the international situation, right-wing elements became more vocal than usual. In particular, the unification of Korea delivered a significant shock to the right-wing. This was because they firmly believed they could benefit from a war boom, similar to what occurred roughly 50 years prior. But since that didn’t happen, it was truly absurd from their perspective.

Russia seemed to be internally conflicted. Even while grappling with internal issues, the price of oil was continuously declining, leading to frustration. Russia’s real economy fluctuated wildly, and arms reduction, which had been barely suppressed, was now under serious discussion.

If forced to reduce their military, they feared being unable to withstand the increasingly powerful virtual enemy, the EU. They had been constantly experiencing internal conflicts since integrating into the European army, but whether this would truly lead to division remained uncertain.

Europe was entering a new era and gradually showing signs of moving beyond a union of states toward becoming a fully unified nation. Whether they would actually achieve complete unification remained to be seen, but the fact that they demonstrated this possibility was quite encouraging for Europe.

However, even amidst this encouragement, they were struggling with the ongoing war on terror. It would be one thing if it were confined to the Middle East, but with bombs detonating in popular tourist destinations and indiscriminate killings occurring frequently, ordinary people were growing increasingly weary.

After enduring horrific terrorist attacks, the public initially reacted with a cry for vengeance: “Crush the terrorists!” However, as time passed, this initial, unthinking desire for retaliation subsided, and more nuanced opinions began to emerge.

People began to move beyond simply demanding retribution (“We were attacked, so we must retaliate”) and started contemplating the root causes: “Why were we attacked in the first place?” Consequently, the idea of EU forces withdrawing from the Middle East gained traction. This sentiment wasn’t limited to the public; at least the German government favored it.

However, the interwoven interests of each nation made a simple withdrawal impossible. To pull back a military that was nearing complete unification, member states needed to reach a consensus, or at least a rough agreement, but their opinions were sharply divided.

This division stemmed from the uneven distribution of defense spending during the early stages of integration, with some countries running deficits while others profited. Not all countries were eager to accelerate the integration of the European army, nor were they willing to increase their financial contributions. As a result, reforms were slow and incremental.

Fortunately, there was progress, however slow, and no regression. Some countries were even considering entrusting their naval power to NATO, specifically the United States. While they could manage the army, the navy was seen as a costly burden.

This was a matter of pure economics. Moreover, since only countries with coastlines bore the responsibility, landlocked nations benefited. Any attempt to share the burden with landlocked countries would undoubtedly face strong opposition. The reasoning was simple: even if the navy suffered devastating losses, the landlocked countries wouldn’t directly experience the damage. Of course, they would suffer economic repercussions, but it was unrealistic to expect them to be immune to the economic consequences of war in the first place.

Returning to the election discussion, these complex factors led Europe to focus on a single question: “Will the U.S. military be reduced, maintained, or strengthened during Bush’s next term?” The EU’s economic trajectory could hinge on the answer.

India, meanwhile, was focused on strengthening its administrative power. The alliance with the United States was hailed as the current government’s greatest achievement, and thanks to technical cooperation, they had managed to transform the Arjun tank into a viable fighting machine. Even though this “transformation” essentially involved a complete redesign from the ground up, the exterior remained largely unchanged, perhaps due to national pride.

However, other aspects of governance were not as well-managed. Although India aspired to be a rule-of-law state, the reality fell short. Custom and tradition held sway, and corruption within public authority was rampant. However, this wasn’t entirely negative. In a way, it ensured that the system remained stable and functional within their own cultural context.

Scientific exchanges between the United States and India had been flourishing for some time, reaching their peak during the Bush administration. Therefore, India viewed the prospect of a change in presidency with a sense of indifference, not expecting significant shifts in policy. They were content with the existing level of influence and sought no more.

In the Middle East, anti-American and anti-European sentiments were on the rise. However, Iraq and Afghanistan were notable exceptions. Iraq distanced itself from the anti-European movement, and Afghanistan from the anti-American movement, for obvious reasons tied to their respective relationships with the involved powers.

Therefore, excluding these two countries, the rest of the Middle East showed little interest in the election across the Atlantic. Their attitude was, “We don’t care what happens over there; we just want them to leave us alone.” Afghanistan, however, viewed Bush’s re-election favorably.

After all, Bush was seen as instrumental in rebuilding Afghanistan, and he continued to provide substantial aid.

This isn’t to say that there was no anti-American sentiment in Afghanistan, but it lacked the intensity and widespread support found in other Middle Eastern countries.

Most African countries were in a state of unease. They recognized that the United States, particularly under George W. Bush, was openly seeking to expand its influence on the African continent. However, Europe was doing the same, leaving African countries 고민하고 [agonizing/unsure] about which side to align with.

Since both powers were so openly vying for influence, remaining neutral was becoming increasingly difficult. They had explored closer ties with China, which was perceived as less antagonistic, but those efforts faltered after China’s economic collapse [referring to a fictional event within the story’s context].

Therefore, their perspective boiled down to two key questions: “Will Bush continue to invest heavily in the African continent during his next term?” and, assuming he would continue to exert influence, “Which countries will be targeted for additional influence?”

At the very least, they were determined to avoid the fate of Sudan, which was facing internal division. While certain factions or minority groups might welcome external intervention, the governments of each country certainly did not, especially after Europe’s decision to support Kurdish independence, which heightened their anxieties.

Everything flowed like water, and time flowed along with the big and small events. Finally, the 2004 Athens Olympics arrived in Greece.