Inside A Conservative's Mind

Financial Times ^ | 9-10 October 2004 | Mike Steinberger

[mack98]

Lunch with the FT: Robert Kagan By Mike Steinberger

The day before I was to have lunch with Robert Kagan, I was flipping through a copy of Rolling Stone while waiting my turn at the barber shop. I came across a rather arresting comment, attributed to Middle East expert Youssef Ibrahim: “The neocons are vampires through which we have to drive a wooden stake.” ...

[mack98]

The 9-10 October Financial Times offers contributor Mike Steinberger's latest column in which he interviews Robert Kagan of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and The Weekly Standard. Kagan, you might recall, was one of the leading proponents of the war against Saddam Hussein and his gang of henchmen. Incidentally, Kagan's wife is currently an adviser to VP Dick Cheney.

The piece is interesting for several reasons. First, it offers a glimpse into the thinking of someone who's been influential in Conservative/GOP circles over the years. His thinking, I suspect, is a reflection of the thought shared by many on the ideological right. Second, Steinberger successfully draws out several insightful quotes, worth noting and discussing. Third, it's the kind of interview sorely lacking in today's mainstream US newspaper. I encourage you to look it up at http://snipurl.com/9ns6 .

Here are a few snippets. You decide if it's just spin. For FT newspaper subscribers, see p. W4, "The pros and neocons of the Iraq war." So we get through as much as possible in this space, I've grouped Kagan's responses. Naturally, there's a great deal more in Steinberger's column, but here are a few notables:

Post-War Iraq Planning Kagan: "I'm surprised by how ill-prepared the Bush administration was to handle the war's aftermath. But we can overcome a lot of mistakes."

US, the 600 Pound Sumo Wrestler Kagan: "If you go back and look at the history of American foreign policy and American occupations, we don't win on brilliance. We tend to win on combination of will and economic and military power. We're like the 600lb sumo wrester -- if we keep leaning on someone long enough, they ultimately fall over."

Abu Ghraib, US Occupation Kagan: The prison abuse scandal is "a secondary issue for most Iraqis; what mainly concerns them is not the American occupation but who is going to be running the country."

Why Saddam Hussein was Deposed Kagan: "I don't care what anybody says -- we didn't invade Iraq in order to turn it into a democracy and make it a beacon for the rest of the Arab world. That was an ex post facto rationalism -- a correct one, in my opinion, but not the reason the US went to war." Instead, writes Steinberger, Kagan believes that Saddam Hussein was deposed "because of the weapons he was believed to possess and the danger he was thought to pose to other countries, not least the US." [My Note: The Deufler report makes clear that Saddam wasn't seeking nuclear weapon capability. While the world's intel orgs (eg, Brits, Russia, etc) agreed that Saddam Hussein possessed WMDs, some continue to squarely pin the blame on President Bush.]

Real Reason Why Germany Didn't [and won't] Send Troops To Iraq Kagan: "..European publics, and to some extent governments, did get the message of March 11 [the day Islamic terrorists struck in Madrid, killing 198 people]. I believe that some element of the reluctance of the German government to send troops to Iraq is the knowledge that it would make them more of a target."

Why a Kerry Win in November Would Benefit US Kagan: "There are many reasons why, in theory, the US would benefit from a Democratic victory. It is important for the Democrats to own the war on terrorism and not simply be the opposition. Also, we would have a fresh start with the Europeans and other allies, though they would quickly be disillusioned to learn that Kerry wouldn't be that different from Bush in some respects."

Kagan, a Neocon? He Doesn't Think So Kagan: “I’m not at all comfortable with the term [‘neocon’] – in a lot of people’s minds, it means things I personally don’t agree with. It is equated with willful unilateralism; my preference is for multilateral action.”

###

[DestroytheDemocrats]

Very good article. Thanks.