After Aznar
This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.

It looks like Al Qaeda got what it wanted if it is confirmed that it bombed those trains in Madrid. The decision by the Spanish voters to revoke the mandate of Prime Minister Aznar’s governing Popular Party sidelines one of President Bush’s most important allies in the war for democracy in the Arab world. The man who will replace Mr. Aznar, Rodriguez Zapatero, campaigned on a plank to bring the Spanish soldiers risking their lives in Iraq home. Until Thursday, it looked like his party would remain a minority. But after 10 bombs ripped through four trains and killed 200 people, the tide began to turn in favor of the Socialists.
As Mr. Aznar cast his own vote yesterday, he was taunted by onlookers with chants of “manipulator.” At Mr. Zapatero’s victory speech, the crowd reminded him that 200 were not there. In demonstrations before Sunday’s vote, crowds held placards declaring, “Your war, our dead.” And it certainly appears there was a link between Thursday’s attacks and Spain’s support of the Iraq war. Osama bin Laden, in an audiotape issued in October and since authenticated,
promised mayhem in Spain and singled out those European states that supported the war to unseat Saddam Hussein. Over the weekend, a videotape, allegedly from Al Qaeda, claimed credit for the blasts. On it a man with a thick Moroccan accent said, “You love life and we love death.”
Well, Americans will remember Mr. Aznar not as a leader who brought death upon his people, but as a leader who refused to appease terror and stood with our country, often at great political risk. Since a year ago, when he joined President Bush and Prime Minister Blair in a war council off the coast of Portugal, Mr. Aznar has followed principle over politics as he sent his nation’s soldiers to fight a war that three fourths of his countrymen were found by pollsters not to support.
Back in February, Mr. Aznar addressed a rare Joint Session of the Congress and spelled out why he made that decision. He said, “We want to occupy a position in the first line of defense of democracy and the rule of law alongside friends and allies, in good times as well as in times of difficulty. We share with you values and principles. And let me say that our commitment to freedom is unwavering.”
He made it clear in that speech that he comprehended the attacks of September 11 as attacks on not only New York and northern Virginia, but all of civilization. In that speech he said, “Terrorism threw down a calculated challenge to the values of our core humanity: freedom, moral decency, compassion, and respect for the lives of others.” And he saw the risk of Iraq obtaining weapons of mass destruction as unacceptable. “Faced with the risk that these weapons might be used by terrorist groups, we cannot stand by and do nothing,”he told the Joint Session. “To ignore this reality would not only be highly irresponsible, but would prove extremely costly in terms of our own security and freedom.”
Mr. Aznar’s words were not only a challenge to Al Qaeda but to many of his European peers, who for years had sought to accommodate terror by cutting deals with its state sponsors and, in the case of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, deal them into peace negotiations. They moved Spain into a leadership role worthy of its king, Juan Carlos, who shepherded the country to a democracy that was anything but automatic after the regime of Franco. The moment will be remembered, even if Mr. Zapatero retreats from the Battle of Iraq. And an ever greater premium will be placed on the ability of Mr. Bush to sustain his own leadership in the world war against Islamic terror that was started with the attacks against America two and a half years ago.