President Bush's 2006 state of the Union address was distinctive in two quite different ways. It was distinctive,first,for the assurance with which he delivered it. Gone was the stuttering malaprop-prone Bush of old. Here was a fluent and passionate public advocate, whose confidence belied his languishing poll ratings and the policy stalemate he faces at home.
But it was distinctive,second,for what he had to say about energy. Mr Bush has always prided himself on being a Texan and a former oilman. Accurate or not, the image he projected was that of the greedy American, confident that his country was big enough and rich enough to feed his own and his countrymen's gargantuan appetites. The gas-guzzling sports utility vehicles that sustained the US car industry during his first term seemed to symbolise that profligacy.
On Tuesday night, however, he changed his tune. After pledging as expected that the US was in Irag for the duration and insisting that Iran mend it's wicked ways, Mr Bush suddenly introduced a new theme. The United States, he told his unsuspecting audience, had to break it "addiction" to oil. And, sunny optimist though he usually is, he went on to describe US dependence on imported oils "a serious problem".
As with any addiction, acknowledgement that there is a problem is the first step to recovery. So the significance of this moment cannot be overestimated. For the Texan oil president to talk about reining in America's thirst for oil marks a welcome recognition of reality. Whether Mr Bush will draw the necessary conclusion, however, is another matter. He linked his conversation to the continuing insecurity in the middle east. The US, he said, was far too reliant on oil from unstable countries. He said oil imports from the region had to be slashed by 75 percent, and proposed a plan that would see america's cars powered by fuel cells and ethanol made from maize,sugar and grass. He called for a large increase in funding for clean-energy research, including the development of solar and wind energy, cleaner-burning coal and nuclear power.
Mr Bush's concern to reduce dependency on middle east oil was a tacit admission-the only one in his speech-that the miltary intervention in iraq had failed to produce at least one of the desired effects: a large increase in oil production and more secure conditions for its export. He seems to have recognised the aim of achiening energy security by spreading democarcy across the middle east is unattainable, at least in the short term, and possibly ever. This looks very like the end of the Bush admiistration's project to bring freedom, and democracy and "american values" to the region, despite the loft promises he made to irag in the same speech.
Where Mr Bush's new realism falls most seriously short, however, is the remedies he offered. The increase in funding research in to alternative energy resouces is small indeed beside America's enormous consumption, And whether Mr Bush can extend his conversion to alternative energy to his fellow Americans is another question. The craze for huge cars may be waining, but the United States is still far more car dependent than most other countries, and changing the mentality will take much higher prices and a corresponding political will.
Most disappointing about Mr Bush's call for a new approach to energy, however, was his failure to consider the global context and reverse his rejection of the Kyoto treaty. While a reduction in US oil comsumption might help reduce the country's carbon emissions. Mr Bush has still not acknowledge climate change as a pronlem to be tackled co-operatively. Until he does so, his conversion will be sadly incomplete.
The President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has angrily rounded on George Bush, saying his arms "are smeared up to the elbow in the blood of other nations".
Mr Bush referred to Iran in his State of the Union address on Tuesday night as "a nation now held hostage by a small clerical elite that is isolating and repressing its people". Mr Ahmadinejad responded by saying that Mr Bush had become President only by "spending billions of dollars and resorting to the court verdict".
At an emergency meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency governing board today, Iran expects to learn that it will face the UN Security Council in March, and possible sanctions over its decision to restart uranium enrichment activities.
Iran says it has complied fully with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and claims it is being bullied by Western countries who want to deny it the benefits of atomic energy. The country's head nuclear negotiator said Iran's main enrichment plant was ready for full operation in case of a referral to the Security Council. "We only need notify the IAEA that we are resuming [large-scale] enrichment. When we do that is our call," Ali Larijani said. "If they [report Iran to the Council], we will do it quickly." The Defence Minister, Mostafa Mohammed Najar, warned: "Any aggression against Iran's nuclear facilities will trigger a very immediate and crushing response from the armed forces."
On the streets of Tehran, Mr Bush's comments and the growing international pressure over Iran's nuclear programme provoked reactions from fierce anger at the United States to criticism of Mr Ahmedinejad's government.
"There's a lot of exaggeration about Iran abroad," said Sara, a 25-year-old student at Tehran university. "The elections we had last year were the best witness to our democracy. I voted for Rafsanjani and he lost, but the fact nobody knew who would win was proof we have democracy."
Her friend Azra, a literature student, said: "I'm one of those who shouts out when we have problems here, but it doesn't mean we don't have some democracy. When there is pressure from the outside, the problems increase."
Some expressed fear about Washington's ultimate goals. Anis, a 17-year-old student, said: "We should be afraid of the US after seeing what they did in Iraq. They promised to help the Iraqi people but they just started a war and killed lots of people."
The President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has angrily rounded on George Bush, saying his arms "are smeared up to the elbow in the blood of other nations".
Mr Bush referred to Iran in his State of the Union address on Tuesday night as "a nation now held hostage by a small clerical elite that is isolating and repressing its people". Mr Ahmadinejad responded by saying that Mr Bush had become President only by "spending billions of dollars and resorting to the court verdict".
At an emergency meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency governing board today, Iran expects to learn that it will face the UN Security Council in March, and possible sanctions over its decision to restart uranium enrichment activities.
Iran says it has complied fully with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and claims it is being bullied by Western countries who want to deny it the benefits of atomic energy. The country's head nuclear negotiator said Iran's main enrichment plant was ready for full operation in case of a referral to the Security Council. "We only need notify the IAEA that we are resuming [large-scale] enrichment. When we do that is our call," Ali Larijani said. "If they [report Iran to the Council], we will do it quickly." The Defence Minister, Mostafa Mohammed Najar, warned: "Any aggression against Iran's nuclear facilities will trigger a very immediate and crushing response from the armed forces."
On the streets of Tehran, Mr Bush's comments and the growing international pressure over Iran's nuclear programme provoked reactions from fierce anger at the United States to criticism of Mr Ahmedinejad's government.
"There's a lot of exaggeration about Iran abroad," said Sara, a 25-year-old student at Tehran university. "The elections we had last year were the best witness to our democracy. I voted for Rafsanjani and he lost, but the fact nobody knew who would win was proof we have democracy."
Her friend Azra, a literature student, said: "I'm one of those who shouts out when we have problems here, but it doesn't mean we don't have some democracy. When there is pressure from the outside, the problems increase."
Some expressed fear about Washington's ultimate goals. Anis, a 17-year-old student, said: "We should be afraid of the US after seeing what they did in Iraq. They promised to help the Iraqi people but they just started a war and killed lots of people