If the purpose of commissioning the bi-partisan report was to provide cover for the GW Bush administration to change course in how the war is being conducted (and by extension devising or suggesting a series of possible exit strategies) then the reaction of the President suggests that it's a failure. If its purpose was to deflect criticism until after the 2006 mid-term elections, then it's a partial success. The electoral blow of losing the House and the Senate doesn't seem to have "popped" the bubble around Bush. While his language -- now he seems to be promoting bipartisanship -- has changed slightly, and he has replaced an ideologically driven Rumsfeld with a "realist" Gates, I fear little has really changed in the White House and, therefore, nothing will come out of the report other than using up a lot of paper and ink printing up the requisite number of published copies. Unless there's a real commitment on the part of the Bush Administration to find a real way to get out of Iraq, the situation in Iraq and for the "American enterprise" will continue to erode. It'll be a game of self-deception and continuing senseless bloodshed. That it's coming from an administration whose top leaders consciously avoided action in the last American fiasco, the Vietnam War.
One of the centre planks of the report is to address, and possible even resolve, the other conflicts in the region; the Israel-Palestinian/Arab conflict, the situation in Lebanon, under the assumption that they are driven the Iraqi insurgency (civil war, anarchy -- you choose your favorite term). While it's true the region is highly unstable and conflictive and that each individual conflict has undercurrent of the other regional conflicts, it's naive to think that resolving anyone specific conflict (despite the talk of many of the Arab governments and elites and their supporters) will launch a domino effect as the other conflicts are resolved in its wake. The suggestion is more an act of desperation than inspiration.
The Arab/Palestinian-Israel conflict is the favorite "whipping boy" for the Arabs. It helps the governments and many people divert their attention from the desperate situation they're living in by using Israel as a scapegoat. Denial and avoidance are wonderful psychological defense mechanisms, however, as a way to live and improve their life (style) is dysfunctional. This is not to say that greater outside attention needs to be devoted to encouraging both (all) side to act responsibly and act in good faith to create the necessary conditions for resolving the conflict and have both sides live in peace and cooperation.
The Lebanon's crises has been ongoing since its establishment in the 1920s. The Civil War of the 1980s, and today's political crisis is driven by power plays cloaked in sectarian terms -- Shia, Maronite, Druze; Amal vs Hezbollah; pro-Syrian vs independents ... Resolving this crisis will certainly help stabilize the region. However, beyond reducing Syrian influence (my bias and hope), it'll do nothing to resolving the Iraqi situation and quagmire.
At issue for me are:
- Reversing the anti-West (read US) animosity.
- Restoring the American prestige around the world, but especially in the region and among Moslems and Arabs.
- Getting out of Iraq so attention can be devoted to real issues like the nuclearization of Iran and North Korea, the rise of Asia and China and India in particular, the weak American economy (and the dropping value of the US dollar) partially generated by the ballooning deficit, the domestic issues like healthcare, social welfare, education ...
My faith in government has been greatly weaken recently (more in another post). The report has done nothing to cause me to think the trend is reversing itself. Too bad!
No comments:
Post a Comment