Domain of the Diplo

A Missed Opportunity by Dave Kirby

I have no illusions about Bush's dedication to the PNAC doctrine. Its central theme - using our power to bully and intimidate anyone who speedbumps our strategic interests, positioning ourselves as oil well cops, creating a larger and more threatening world presence as a (supposed) insurance policy against future 9/11's - dovetails quite nicely into Bush's own view of "we're the big dogs, we don't need permission", and his impatience with the plodding insecurities of diplomacy and cross-cultural sensitivities.

9/11, of course, was exactly the wrong thing to happen on this man's watch, since it created a public carte blanche effect on his presidency and frighteningly simplistic world vision, and especially with regards to the Middle East and Muslim Asia. I'm reluctant to swallow conspiracy theories that hold him directly complicit for 9/11, but I'm comfortable with a liHOP position in some respects. As a means to unleash his basest political aspirations, he couldn't have created a more perfect scenario.

I do, however, find myself stammering somewhat at a solid rejection of the removal by force of Hussein and his sons. I just read an account of Uday's treatment of olympic athletes, and it turned my gut. This shit has got to stop. It must. The IOC basically knew about it and turned a blind eye.

It's been bothering me that I haven't been able to reconcile my strong belief in human rights (and especially our responsibility as a world power to act aggressively to alleviate the oppression and suffering of otherwise powerless people) with my opposition to this action. I believe quite firmly that we have an obligation to use our wealth, influence and basic adherence to humanistic ideals to help the plight of the suffering. I supported Kosovo for this reason.
I also believe that :

1. snubbing our friends to pursue this action will rend relations with people we need desperately in whatever portion of the War on Terror that is actually legitimate, and put us in worse shape in bilateral issues in the future. Tensions are already rising with Russia (who absolutely WILL matter again in only a few years) and Germany.
2. snubbing the United Nations, when we will need them increasingly as poor nations become wealthier, when wealthier nations become older, and as natural resources deplete. (To say nothing of policing Iraq after Saddam.). Especially the whole inspections thing: sending in inspectors with the now-obvious purpose of having them find violations (however small) of UN resolutions, to create a pretext to war - then, finding (essentially) none and going to war anyway. Bush's impatience will the UN on this matter will scar our relationship with that body for many years. His belief is that we lose nothing by ignoring stuttering and indecisive diplomats - but he is gambling on the example we set, and I don't like the odds.
3. failing to make a convincing case for action based on security matters, yet using it as a fundamental pretext to the American people. ("We are helping to prevent future 9/11's...") Simultaneously asserting that Saddam poses a grave threat to world peace and then reassuring us that this will be a swift and clean operation (only pulling back on that in the last few weeks on this, once public opinion had stabilized...) because the Iraqis are vastly weaker than in 1991 is an obvious paradox that only his critics ever seemed to point out.

This, I believe, is how this should have been handled :

Bush should have made his argument on the basis of Saddam's human rights record - FIRST and FOREMOST. He should have shamed the UN for not revealing it, and publicly and vigorously denouncing it, and theatening UN-sanctioned to stop it. He should have lobbied hard for neighboring Muslim nations (and especially those who are naturally distrustful of us) - he should have made the argument, "Look, we WILL engage to help the plight of the Palestinians - but YOU MUST ALSO engage to stop the suffering in Iraq. You must use OPEC's leverage against Saddam. You must communicate to YOUR PEOPLE that what Saddam is doing to HIS people (your brothers) is evil (say it's as bad as the US, if that helps) and against Allah, and that it invites scrutiny and disapproval and meddling from the West. Saddam has killed more Muslims than Israel has. Where is your outrage - where is your shame? Why should a country of so much wealth see so much suffering and fear? Is that acceptable to you, as Muslims?" In short, we cannot allow Muslim nations to escape the hypocrisy of decrying Israel and their legitimate complaints against them, while simultaneously ignoring the brutality of the Baathist regime, who is at least as murderous, and probably more so.

We risk aligning ourselves with the fundamentalists on this matter - then again, how have we benefitted from confronting them?

Saddam has no allies, only vaguely embarrassed business partners. Everyone is afraid of his treasure sliding into the sand, out of sight, thus they suffer his petty cruelties and comical vainglory out of selfishness, with one eye on the shimmering pile of gold visible over his shoulder.

We could have assisted Muslim nations in their embargoing of Saddam, and, if necessary, THEIR military action against his regime. We could have helped financially and rhetorically. We would need the assistance of nations and agents with more legitimacy with the Muslim nations - France (ironically) would have been one. libya would have GLADLY taken the chance to reinforce their newer, more responsible image. Russia, who needs LOTS of goodwill with a swelling Muslim population, would have been invaluable. Pakistan. Kuwait (who owes us a favor...). And Jordan and Syria, both now with young, vigorous leaders.

But no. We go this alone (more or less), convinced of our righteousness, condescending to the rest of the world, and we now have images of half-headed Muslim schoolgirls.We have managed to drown a perfectly legitimate goal in brutality, bullying US stereotyping and further isolation. We will satisfy ourselves we have done good, and we will have the gratitude of the Iraqis - but Kuwait's gratitude did not extend far, and certainly did not extend to promoting democracy on its soil, nor anyone else's. We will also (despite our repeated calls for self-determination) be stuck refereeing squabbles between the Sunnis and the Shia's, keeping the Kurds and the Turks apart (haven't had much luck in merely five days thus far), and reconciling ourselves to a no-longer balanced Iran, who'll have one hand in the new Iraqi political cookiejar.

The Left has fallen into a trap - trying to restrain and oppose a president who now, conveniently, characterizes this action as a "liberation" of Iraq, thus pitting his critics against eyewitness Iraqi exiles, human rights organizations and the very notion that our power can be used for good and not for greed . It is indicative of the knee-jerk reflexiveness that Bush-hating has brought us to. Yes, we have no voice because it is easy enough to dismiss us as chickenshits in the face of evil...and yes, we have grown to despise Bush SO MUCH that we cannot accept that, in the end, most Iraqis will be grateful for this outcome. (My prediction is that they'll be happy enough NOT to notice they don't get the democracy they were promised.) In short, the PNAC doctrine will be groomed and sanctified by the joy of a liberated people, and Bush's detractors will be relegated to the wrong side of history, like Lucky lindy's admiration for Hitler. I fear this.

I DO NOT accept the legitimacy of the PNAC, I do not believe that Bush is doing this for the right reason (but, rather, he hides behind the right reason, and there IS one), and I do not believe that Muslim Asia or the ME will be a more stable place for this war. It COULD HAVE BEEN a more stable place had Saddam been shamed and mobbed from power (they did it to Ceaucescu, and to Marcos, and to the Shah, and to Somoza - don't tell me it cannot be done), and we as a nation would have been on the right side of this.

As a semi-serious suggestion: the $75 billion Bush has asked for in this action would dropped $2.5 million into the hands of every single Republican guard footsoldier. Not a single one would have taken this wealth, with the simple pre-requisite that they execute Saddam?

It would have taken longer, yes. More Iraqis would have suffered in that time, probably. The Saudis would grow nervous, naturally. But if we cannot get the UN to sanction military action, we will not NEED them (so the thinking goes) to sanction the advocacy of human rights - since our bombers and tanks now have assumed that role. At our convenience, of course.

Part of the opportunity here was, as some rightwing thinkers have characterized, the goal of helping Islam into modernity. Saddam's regime is secular, but his people are Muslims. In the end, whose modernity prevailed? The modernity of bombs and lies, hollow diplomacy and Tomahawks...or the modernity of helping the worldwide Muslim community rid itself of its worst blight - and doing so with respect and fraternity. It's changing the subject from Israel and Arafat, to some housecleaning and geuine Islamic fraternal empowerment.

Frankly, that road would have taken years of diplomacy and political capital...and frankly, it would have placed genuine belief in the future of the Iraqis to self-determine themselves, and I DO NOT believe this administration wishes to see true self-determination in the Muslim world. If they did, they'd be pointing a gun at Saudi Arabia this very moment.

Still, an honest man, even a Bush hater, must face the fact that a world without Saddam is at least measurably better than one with him. It is the price we'll pay for Bush's impatience, militarism, hypocrisy, dishonesty and elitism that will come due sooner or later, and it will be a high price indeed. By then, though, the Iraqis will have W's statue in Baghdad's main square, and they'll find a way to ignore the broken promises and Ameican corporate subversion of their society. They will owe us, and we won't soon forget.

So - I will aplaude the inevitable demise of Saddam and Qusay and (especially) Uday. But I will wish we had done this differently - and yes, it SHOULD matter that we did it wrong. In a world like this, doing the right thing for the wrong reason and in the wrong way will have its consequences.