by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright March 18, 2004
All Rights Reserved.

pproaching the Iraq War's one-year anniversary March 20, terrorists unloaded deadly arsenals, blowing up trains in Spain, hotels in Baghdad and turning AK-47s on defenseless missionaries. While there are no more rape rooms and torture chambers, some wonder whether the world's really a safer place. When Islamic terrorists hit Spain March 11, Western Europe felt a lot more naked. Spain's misery turned the electorate against the Prime Minister Aznar's conservative party, handing a surprise upset to Zapatero's socialists. Bin Laden promised reprisals for countries supporting the U.S. in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since the end of formal combat operations May 1, the body count rises from car bombs, suicide attacks and deadly roadside booby traps. Trading barbs with Vice President Dick Cheney, Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry blasted the White House for mismanaging post-war Iraq.

      Kerry's main gripe stems not from toppling Saddam but with post-war decisions that alienated the U.N. and potentially strategic partners Russia, France and Germany. Failure to find weapons of mass destruction—the primary rationale for war—was only a minor problem for U.S. allies. Though still upset over WMD, the allies are more bothered by the failure to grant lucrative contracts. Before the war, allies complained about using force. But since the war ended, the U.S. monopolized contracts, giving Russia, France and Germany little reason to support Bush's policies. “Today we know that the mission is not finished, hostilities have not ended, and out men and women in uniform fight almost alone, in reality, with the target squarely on their back and their front,” said Kerry, telling a George Washington University audience that Bush botched the post-war scenario.

      Without awarding foreign contracts, there's little reason to expect wider U.N. involvement. Ever since Secretary of State Colin L. Powell's Feb. 6, 2003 speech justifying war to the U.N. Security Council, key allies haven't gotten behind the U.S. Sure, Poland, Italy and Spain reluctantly committed troops, but others had no reason to get involved. Russia, France and Germany all had strong economic ties to Iraq. Today's post-war Iraq places far too much burden on U.S. troops containing a growing foreign insurgency. Since the war ended, jihadists from Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia flooded Iraq's borders. If post-war reconstruction were handed to the U.N. and supported by NATO, it would rob terrorists of waging holy war against the U.S. Kerry's right that U.S. troops are now prime targets for foreign terrorists. Internationalizing forces would shift the burden off the U.S.

      Campaigning at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, CA, Cheney blasted Kerry for being weak on defense. “It is not an impressive record for someone who aspires to become commander-in-chief in this time of great testing for our country,” said Cheney, referring to Kerry's 19-year track record in the Senate. Cheney pointed to Kerry's votes against the Apache Attack Helicopter, Tomahawk Cruise Missile and the Bradley Fighting Vehicle. Cheney smartly shifted attention to Kerry's dicey record. Painting Kerry as soft on defense raises concerns about his fitness for the presidency in today's age of global terrorism. Raising concerns about domestic terrorism, the Madrid bombings put national security back on the front burner, leaving Democrats scrambling. “No, I do not believe that he is necessarily weak on defense,” said maverick Sen. John McCain (R-Az), rushing to Kerry's rescue.

      Trading barbs, both Kerry and Cheney set the tone for an especially bitter campaign, expected to be another nail-biter, hinging, like 2000, on a few battleground states. Kerry must continue to hammer at Bush's credibility, Iraq policy and today's mushy economy. Bush must define Kerry as a “tax and spend” pacifist. So far, Kerry hasn't defined Bush, other than saying he's mismanaging the economy and bungling post-war Iraq. Republican strategists have an easier job picking apart Kerry's liberal voting record, especially on matters of defense. “The senator from Massachusetts has given us ample doubts about his judgment and the attitude he brings to bear on vital issues of national security,” said Cheney, raising concerns about Kerry's national security credentials. Kerry must allay doubts by reminding voters he doesn't pander, like Bush and Cheney, to the defense industry.

      Coming out swinging, Cheney landed some heavy blows, raising doubts about Kerry's liberal credentials, especially his track record on defense and national security. Instead of raising the issue of WMD, Kerry hammered Bush's post-war strategy. Kerry must connect the dots between Bush's massive defense spending, soaring budget deficits, today's anemic economy, and, more importantly, GOP plans to reduce deficits by cutting Social Security benefits of 76-million baby boomers. He must also remind voters that it's time to internationalize post-war Iraq, finally giving lucrative contracts to Russia, Germany and France. When Bush touts low interest rates, Kerry should remind voters it's a sign of a sick economy, not low inflation. Supporting the troops involves more than buying Kevlar vests: It involves finding an exit strategy, sticking to a plan and getting the troops out of harm's way.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2002 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.