by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright May 25, 2004
All Rights Reserved.

n a strange irony, President George W. Bush chose to resuscitate his flagging Iraq policy at the Army War College, the same place condemning his approach back in December. Watching an escalating guerrilla war, the prestigious college denounced Bush's policy for diverting attention away from Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, wasting precious resources on Iraq. To a partisan crowd, Bush presented his case for Iraq's liberation, insisting that democracy would “transform” the Middle East. Rehashing old ideas, Bush made Iraq an essential theater in the larger war on terror. Bush told his audience that Iraq was the “central front for the war on terror,” warning that there was no option other than defeating terrorists. Bush avoided prewar intelligence “failures,” and specifically fraudulent intelligence supplied by now discredited White House advisor Ahmad Chalabi.

      Nothing was said about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction, the precise point on which the U.S. and U.N. diverged before the war. Now that reelection prospects are dimmed, the White House endorses the U.N. special envoy Lakhdar Brahimi's blueprint for Iraq sovereignty. Trashing former chief U.N. weapons inspector Dr. Hans Blix, the White House emphatically rejected the U.N. meddling in U.S. foreign policy. Now that Iraq confronts chaos and the White House faces extinction in November, it's time to punt to the U.N. Following Sept. 11, neoconservatives like Vice President Dick Cheney, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz and Pentagon advisor Richard Perle rejected turning national security over to the U.N. “There are difficult days ahead,” Bush said, dampening expectations about containing rising violence and anarchy.

      Instead of offering an exit strategy, Bush rehashed old ideas about liberating Iraq at the expense of the U.S. treasury and American lives. “We will persevere and defeat this enemy and hold hard-won ground for the realm of liberty,” said Bush, refusing to rethink his Iraq policy. Nothing was mentioned about the state-sponsored terrorism, including a concerted effort by Russian and China to supply cheap arms to Syria, Iran and the Sudan. Seized weapons turned up sophisticated Russian and Chinese-made night-vision goggles and scopes, leveling U.S. night fighting superiority. Russia and China have vested interests in seeing the U.S. fail in Iraq. Putin didn't forget President Jimmy Carter's boycott of the 1980 Moscow Olympics or President Ronald Reagan's support of Osama bin Laden and his mujahedeen fighters, evicting Russia from Afghanistan in 1985—five years before the collapse of the Soviet Union.

      Iran has no love lost for the United States either. After Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini booted the Shah and ransacked the U.S. embassy, taking hostages in 1979, Carter gave unequivocal support to Saddam Hussein fighting the Iran-Iraq War in 1980. Iran doesn't forget Saddam's use of chemical weapons, supplied by the Reagan administration, concerned that Khomeini would spread Islamic revolution to neighboring Iraq—containing 65% Shiites and housing Islam's holiest shrines. When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1991, President George W. Bush stopped short of toppling Saddam in Gulf War because of the expected power vacuum. Concerned about civil war—with Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites—Bush-41 left Saddam in Baghdad, knowing that losing his iron grip would send Iraq into anarchy. Bush-41's prophecy came true, watching today's Iraq descend into bloody guerrilla war.

      When the Marine barracks in Lebanon was truck-bombed Oct. 23, 1983, Reagan and Bush had little knowledge of Osama bin Laden or the insidious intent of radical Islam. Twenty-years in the making, Sept. 11 turned U.S. foreign policy on its head, realizing that America's enemy was no longer the Soviet Union but Islamic fundamentalists. America's old enemies have picked new surrogates, supporting, funding and supplying radicals against U.S. interests. President Bush now calls Iraq the “central front in the war on terror,” justifying his policy. As the Army War College correctly noted, Iraq has become a costly detour in the U.S. war on terror. With endless streams of terrorists crossing Iraq's borders and rogue regimes supporting the insurgency, Iraq has become a lethal miscalculation. Instead of going back to the drawing board, Bush insists on holding course.

      Facing growing doubts about his Iraq policy, Bush finds himself with a tough sell heading into November. Dishing control to Lakhdar Brahimi and the U.N. hints at quiet desperation and possible change of plans. Instead of sinking-or-swimming with his current policy, Bush should reassess the short and long term costs of staying the course. “Somebody screwed up. And at this level and at this stage, it should be evident to everybody that they've screwed up,” said retired Gen. Anthony Zinni, who once commanded U.S. forces in Iraq. Before crying politics and going on the attack, the White House should listen to its critics on both sides of the aisle. No branch of the U.S. military has succeeded at fighting and winning a guerrilla war. Now that Bush knows Iraq is no longer a threat to national security, it's time to admit mistakes, make corrections and rethink the mission.

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.