by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright April 2, 2007
All Rights Reserved.

eceiving an honorary degree from Tokyo's Waseda University, former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger confessed that military victory is no longer possible in Iraq. That's quite a reversal from one of President George W. Bush's closest kitchen Cabinet advisors, counseling stubborn resoluteness in fighting the war. “A ‘military victory' in the sense of total control over the whole territory, imposed on the entire population, is no longer possible,” said Kissinger, saying essentially nothing, since “total” control was never Bush's benchmark. Bush has made it clear that he wants to equip Iraq's military to take over for U.S. troops, to sustain, maintain and defend Iraq's fledgling sovereignty. Kissinger sees Iraq as more complicated than Vietnam where he eventually negotiated a settlement with the North, after endless promises, 58,000 U.S. deaths and the reality of defeat.

      As President Richard M. Nixon's National Security Advisor, Kissinger supported the 1969 carpet-bombing of Cambodia, hoping it would destroy North Vietnamese supply lines and bring Hanoi to the table. Despite the abysmal failure, Nixon went to his grave asserting the U.S. won the war. History said otherwise but Nixon and Kissinger stubbornly adhered to the belief U.S. military power could reverse Ho Chi Minh's nationalist movement. Unwilling to accept defeat in Iraq, Kissinger counseled Bush to stay-the-course, something he refuses to give up. Kissinger now believes Iraq cannot be won militarily. “It is a more complicated problem,” Kissinger admitted. "The Vietnam War involved states, and you could negotiate with leaders who controlled a defined area,” pointing out the major difference with Iraq, namely, there's no legal authority with whom to negotiate.

      Since Cruise missiles hit Baghdad with “shock-and-awe” March 20, 2003, Kissinger counseled Bush to apply full force until military victory. With the stakes so high after Sept. 11, Kissinger warned Bush to not allow Iraq turn into another Vietnam. Leaving Iraq prematurely would be disastrous for American credibility and prestige, leaving the country vulnerable to future terrorist attacks. Kissinger's theory still drives Bush's Iraq policy, despite recent confessions that military victory isn't possible. Over the last four years, Kissinger cautioned Bush that leaving Iraq would create chaos, exacerbating worldwide terrorism. That was the exact same argument used to keep the Vietnam War going for 10 years. Despite Bush's recent troop surge and positive statements from Sen. John McCain visiting Iraq, Kissinger believes U.S. military force cannot prevail.

      Back in Vietnam, Kissinger used the “domino theory” to justify U.S. involvement in a brutal civil war and nationalistic movement. He admired President Lyndon Johnson's Defense Secretary Robert McNamara for his “Whiz-kid” approach to managing the Pentagon. During his tenure at the Defense Department, McNamara produced complex statistical proof that the U.S. was winning in Vietnam. Kissinger, a 1954 Harvard Ph.D. in political science, followed McNamara's lead, orchestrating four more years of failure, until finally selling out South Vietnam President Nguyen van Thieu and eventually signing the Paris Peace Accords with Le Duc Tho, ending the war. Kissinger and Tho won Nobel Peace Prizes in 1973, though Tho rejected his. Like in Vietnam, Kissinger's, bubbly expectations now soured on Iraq, no longer believing victory was possible.

      After counseling resilience, Kissinger now admits that the Pentagon can't win in Iraq. “I am basically sympathetic to President Bush,” said Henry. “I am partly sympathetic because I have seen comparable situations,” admitting that Iraq has turned into another Vietnam. Where's the sympathy for soldiers and families enduring death and permanent disabilities? Like Nixon and Kissinger in Vietnam, Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice hoped building up Iraq's new military would stem the bottomless insurgency, fighting U.S. occupation. Like Vietnam, the Russians still supply the enemy with the weapons needed to counter U.S. influence. Instead of installing Soviet-style regimes, the Russians are content collect the checks for supplying the weapons and ammo. Kissinger's new vision for success involves finding the next Le Duc Tho—perhaps radical Shiite cleric Muqutada al-Sadr.

      Kissinger blames failure in Iraq on partisan bickering in Washington. Bush has recently equated Democrats' questioning the war—and his $124 Billion Pentagon emergency funding request—with aiding-and-abetting the insurgents. “The role of America in the world cannot be defined by our internal partisan squabbles,” said Kissinger, seeing Iraq as part of U.S. foreign policy in the foreseeable future. If not for the violent protests during Vietnam, Nixon and Kissinger would have not gotten the message. Bush's 30% approval ratings and outcome of the Nov. 7 midyear election didn't get the president's attention. Without strong congressional dissent, there's little chance that Bush will change course before the 2008 presidential election. While Kissinger wants to dialogue with Iran and Syria, the U.S. must stop dreaming and find a fix of its own.

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.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.