That Vision Thing? Ronald Reagan, President Bush and the war on Terrorism

Right Side Redux ^ | 10/11/04 | Justin Hart

[RightSideRedux]

I sat down to write a critique of Rich Lowry's cover story for the latest National Review. Those clever marketers at NR know just what buttons to push! The only criticism I can level is at the title: "What went wrong?"

I'll admit I had to jump into the article when I saw the title... but its not at all what it seems to intimate. The title implies finality and assumed disaster. Lowry's piece was extremely insightful, sobering but detailed and in many ways comforting. Instead of trying to bang my head against the wall I'll share a recent experience:

I was speaking to a friend Sunday night about the war. He works as an analyst for the CIA and deals intimately with the Middle East. I asked if he had read or heard about the Bob Novak article article. He said no. I explained the premise to him briefly and commented: "I think Novak was alluding to the certain animus that the State Department holds towards the Bush administration and stating that the same feeling exists at the CIA."

He said it was not animus, but that people hold a certain anxiety towards the current administration. I asked him if he had read my recent article about "The Dominance Motif" that I sent him that I sent him. He had not. I explained the premise behind my article (leftists unrepentantly reading world domination into the Bush doctrine while accusing necons of trying to wreck the economy and halt the social state.) He did not think that accurately represented the feeling there. I pressed him further.

The main complaint he had against the Iraqi war was the assumptions made about the Iraqi people. "These people can't govern themselves. Somebody has to tell them what to do" As Lowry's piece points out: 1) The CIA apparently never made an attempt to correct this misconception and 2) the Iraq infrastructure was so bass-akward as to confuse even the most ambitious human rights expert. Lowry's conclusion was that no amount of planning could have the solved the problems that we find in post-war Iraq today.

My CIA friend continues: "There was no connection between Al Quaeda and Iraq. We've squandered precious resources on a war that is a distraction from the war on terror." I asked: "Doesn't the 9/11 report point to at least some tentative connection to Al Qaeda?" He replied: "None. I know it. I know it." I didn't want to press further, but if I had I would have asked: "Was Saddam a terrorist?" or "When you say 'I know' is that the say as 'It's a slam dunk Mr. President', or 'I know there are weapons of mass destruction?'"

I'm not sure where to take this except to express some questions: what is the nexus between vision vs. policy vs. execution? Are we at another "dust heap of history" moment? When the President touts a vision that is not supported by intelligence how do we deal with it? This vision is something I subscribe to. How do I best express it? As J. Lileks put it today:

I want the definition of success to be "free democratic states in the Middle East and the cessation of support of those governments and fascist states we haven't gotten around to kicking in the ass yet."

I agree. Years (perhaps months) from now, when the Iraqi people get a chance at democracy, will Bush's mantra that freedom can change people be vindicated or defeated... ?

Am I a branded neocon? Probably. Is this vision our only hope? That's how I'm leaning. Is there any chance that the CIA and the State Department will ever see this. Sadly, no.

To sum up: the State Department, the CIA, many elected officials (on the left and right), and many smart people (on the left and right) are questioning what we are doing in Iraq. Their questions stand from the assumption that democracy in Iraq is almost impossible. For all this they call Bush crazy.

Reagan remarked frequently that Communism would soon be on the ash heap of history. Many people thought he was crazy too. But he stuck by his vision and was vindicated. Are we in the same boat?

Originally posted here

[EagleUSA]

Words of wisdom. Washington politicians, in general are short-sighted, living mainly between elections and not aligning their thinking with real, external events to the Hill.

I feel like the author. If we can stick it out, with the proper leadership, this investment in democracy and world security, will have been well worth it.

[Bushruffneck]

We are definitely in the same boat. Years from now, maybe 20, maybe 40, reformists will overthrow Tehran, Damascus and many others. In many ways it will be a repeat in history of modern eastern Europe. Those new democracies will look back and say, how did we get here? When did it start? and of course the middle east reformists will speak the Name George Walker Bush just like eastern Europeans speaks the name of Ronald Wilson Reagan.