Although the issue is far from settled, I’m compelled to provide an interim report on the Iraq War.
For years I’ve watched and listened to the images of this struggle both human and political. I’ve been pained by the course of our national discourse – and discord.
It’s folly, of course, to expect unanimity on any question, and certainly not on one that is a matter of life and death and twisted by politicians for power-brokering among and pandering to base constituencies.
It would also be naïve to suggest that our leaders work solely for the national good (assuming such can be objectively defined and agreed upon) and not also for their own selfish good and political aggrandizement.
But I humbly believe that this country, given our inherent and unmistakable human frailties, has sorely fallen off the track and lost its moral compass. By moral compass, I’m not referring to pro- or anti-Iraqi War; I’m talking about our collective inability and unwillingness to simply talk with – and not yell at – each other.
We’re screaming at one another, and have been since…when? Was it Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky or was it Bush v. Gore?
This is not helping. And while some may hold up this tension as testament to a thriving democracy, I say that this poisonous partisanship points to the poverty of entrenched positions. We’d rather hold fast to views than discuss them with an opponent and find some common ground.
This column was triggered by the Op-Ed page of the August 11, 2006, Washington Post. No fewer than four (!) articles addressed one aspect or another of the Iraqi War.
E.J. Dionne contends that those against the War are not on the Far Left of the political spectrum unless one links the 60% of the population which now disapproves of the conflict (per one poll) with the Far Left.
Eugene Robinson says that President Bush merely avers that he’s fighting terrorism, but he’s badly misinterpreted its true target: Osama bin Laden.
Newt Gingrich notes that eliminating any possibility of Iranian nuclear weapons is a prerequisite to peace in the Middle East. Without achieving this, regional stability is a pipe dream.
Finally, Charles Krauthammer predicts the Democrat Party will repeat its post-Vietnam War free-fall into the political deep freeze for another 50 years because of its current anti-war sentiments.
There you have it. Our nation is starkly and bitterly divided over Iraq and terrorism and all that that entails. I’m am very disturbed that despite daily prayers to the contrary, I awake to learn of another 30+ people killed in Iraq from suicide bombings. Our nation’s frustration is palpable. We are not accustomed to messy circumstances that can’t be quickly diagnosed and corrected. Iraq certainly confounds our cultural norms.
But not to worry. Where we will go from here is totally within our own corrupting and conniving control. Reassuring, isn’t it?
First, the basics. Reasons for this War: Iraq’s failure to follow multiple United Nations (U.N.) resolutions over a 12-year period (Oh, yeah, remember that); an attempted assassination of a United States President; varying degrees of evidence of prohibited chemical, biological or nuclear weapons of mass destruction (WMD); general loss of faith in our Intelligence Community to portend important developments in Iran and North Korea; and neo-conservatives residing at the highest levels of our government.
Second, the Bush Administration badly mismanaged the message. When WMDs weren’t immediately found, another factor was raised: Saddam as Satan. You’ll note that I didn’t include that casus belli in the preceding paragraph because I don’t believe it was ever seriously considered. Rather, I suggest it was a reflexive ex post facto plea to vindicate our action and excuse our falling into a quixotic quagmire in a strange and distant land. After all, every American loves to see the neighborhood bully taken down a notch or two.
It must also be noted how much our policy makers miscomprehended differences in human perception. America was not regarded as Iraq’s liberator for very long – perhaps a few days or weeks. The Islamic (Arabic as well as other Muslims worldwide) interpretation of Israeli and American actions and intentions is the polar opposite of the average moderate U.S. Democrat or Republican. We are locked in an intransigent, millennial-old battle of culture and ideals.
Third, let us agree, that despite all of our hard-held preconceptions, history will reveal more information than is now available. Much material is undoubtedly classified, and it often takes decades to open it to public view.
The bulk of evidence indicates that the U.S. initially proceeded against Saddam Hussein as U.N. agents and enforcers. Without U.S. military might, the value and purpose of the modern U.N. is questionable: symbolic, yes, but as an organization able to direct and control world events? No.
Perhaps, as many charge, the neo-conservatives were ‘licking their chops’ as they jumped upon this noble stallion and rode it into the sunset on behalf of the One World Government, a.k.a. The United Nations. Again, only history will determine whether that factor was closer to 10% or 90% of the equation.
It’s tragic that our country is so divided, but it’s understandable because we couldn’t ‘accomplish our mission’ within the historical equivalent of a 2-hour television action movie. Our culture is more suited to black-and-white, win-or-lose, and quick results. Those in the Arabic world take a much longer view. I’m sure you’ll recall its reaction to President Bush’s inopportune use of one of our idiomatic words: “crusade.” The Crusades ended 715 years ago! At least they did for the West.
As I said in my opening, this is an interim report, although much water has already passed under the bridge. We’ve learned of our military and management mistakes, and we’re discovered the apparent cultural limits of American-style democracy. You would have thought that past world events that we either observed or participated in would have driven those points home long ago.
What we haven’t learned is whether the War was a historical or philosophical mistake, although killing people in any fashion is not usually regarded as a success. That we’re presently stuck in some mud is undeniable; international political ramifications are terrible, and the proper use of our military and diplomatic corps remains subject to debate.
We must act on these lessons quickly so we can effectively protect our country’s citizens, maintain our way of life, and contribute to a more stable world.
After all, we’re only talking about World Peace.
++++
Fred W. Apelquist, III, M.Ed.
Approximately 1080 words.
(c) August 2006