US press mixed on Bush Iraq visit

Mr Bush told Mr Maliki that US support would continue

US press reaction to President George Bush's visit to Baghdad was torn between cynicism and rare notes of optimism.

Some commentators saw the surprise appearance as little more than an attempt to maximise political capital from the death of insurgent leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Others felt it was a necessary message of support to the new Iraqi government.

In an editorial entitled "Too soon to cheer in Baghdad", the New York Times dubbed the visit a "presidential publicity stunt".

"After too many photo-ops aimed at giving Mr Bush and his fellow Republicans a short-term lift in the domestic opinion polls at election time, Americans hunger more than ever for a realistic game plan for Iraq and some real progress," the paper said.

If we were Maliki, we'd be 'really, really busy' when the American President came a-calling Wonkette blog

It also gave short shrift to White House aide Karl Rove's assertion on Monday that Zarqawi would not have been killed if Democrats calling for troop withdrawal had got their way, describing the statement as a "revealingly nasty, partisan and divisive moment".

'Long overdue'

The Washington Post was more upbeat, seeing Mr Bush's visit as "an important demonstration of American support for Iraq's new democratic government".

"Mr Bush's appearance, and his assurance that America 'will keep its word,' should reassure Iraqis who have feared that the United States would precipitously withdraw rather than defend the country's first truly democratic government," an editorial in the paper said.

The cynical view would be that the trip was a stunt designed to create an illusion of victory as a prelude for troop withdrawals USA Today

Although the paper expressed firm support for the continued presence of US troops, it said that this "may not rescue Iraq's fledgling political system - it may be that nothing can at this point".

The Wall Street Journal described the trip as "long overdue" and "too short", but still determined that it was "worth making".

It said the visit would be an encouragement to US forces and Iraqi citizens alike, and a strong message to insurgents.

"The last week has been the best for Free Iraq in a long time," the editorial read. "Let's hope the president returns soon, perhaps along with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and stays even longer the next time."

'Symbolism matters'

Several commentators interpreted the visit as a comment on the thorny issue of troop withdrawals.

A presidential visit is always meaningful, and this more than most Captain's Quarters blog

USA Today questioned exactly what Mr Bush hoped his visit would achieve.

"The cynical view would be that the trip was a stunt designed to create an illusion of victory as a prelude for troop withdrawals timed to the congressional elections," the paper said.

"The president is under pressure from some in his party to do just that, and it would be a pitiful end to a misguided war.

"But Bush has showed no sign of caving in to that pressure," said the US daily.

Writing from Baghdad, Time magazine's Charles Crain said that, although the visit was largely symbolic, "symbolism matters".

"It puts the president firmly behind new Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki at a moment when speculation in the US has turned to whether the Washington will begin later this year to draw down troop levels."

Bloggers weigh in

Contributors to weblogs were also split.

"Matt", on the blog Cerulian Blue, pulled few punches in his sarcasm: "There's an influx of foreign fighters, a civil war, an appalling lack of basic utilities... and the guy responsible for it all shows up! They must have felt all warm and fuzzy inside."

But "Suzie", writing on the blog Assorted Babble simply describes Mr Bush and his visit as "so brave and so awesome".

The political blog Wonkette suggested Mr Bush's visit might compromise Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki's standing: "It's like pinning a target to his back... If we were Maliki, we'd be 'really, really busy' when the American President came a-calling."

But "Captain Ed" on the Captain's Quarters blog echoed the view of many of the mainstream commentators: "The president does not travel on a whim; no matter who occupies the Oval Office, a presidential visit is always meaningful, and this more than most."