Iraq and Liberalism
Iraq is a true test for those of us who consider ourselves to be liberals. We must be true to our ideals, and not let anger cloud our judgment.
On the one hand, this War has been pursued dishonestly from the beginning. The Bush adminstration clearly knew that Iraq had no direct connection with Al Queda or 9/11. But they also knew that such distinctions were largely lost on the American public. They capitalized on this ignorance and the fear that followed 9/11. They hyped Iraq's nuclear threat beyond the intelligence they had, scaring people with images of mushroom clouds. They used speech after speech to subtely link Saddam to 9/11, going out of their way to foster the misconception that he was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. They were grossly negligent in planning for the war and its aftermath. As diplomats, they were arrogant and incompetent. They demonstrated repeatedly that they did not fully grasp the nature of the war of ideas we are fighting, providing islamic extremists with endless recruiting material. When things went wrong, they refused to acknowledge even the most obvious errors, going as far as promoting those who made the worst mistakes and firing those who expressed disagreement. In short, in the lead up to war the Bush Administration demonstrated remarkable hubris and inexcusable disdain for democratic processes and principles. Since the war began, this administration has demostrated a total lack of competence and has refused to acknowledge any mistakes or hold anyone accountable.
Given all this, it's understandable why many liberals find it so hard to approach the Iraq war objectively. But being a true liberal means being empirical and fair. Let's start by acknowledging that despite the deceptive way in which this war was "sold" to the country and the world, the architects of this war genuinely believed that it was in our country's best interest and that it would help the Iraqi people. This was never about oil or empire. The people responsible for this war genuinely believed that they could reshape the Middle East through military force; that they could create free societies, spread democracy, and ultimately undermine the root causes of islamic terrorism. Call that naive, perhaps, but not sinister.
We must also acknowledge that, however inartfully it was brought about, a seed of democracy has been planted. Saddam is gone, and there is now at least some hope that a democracy will grow in Iraq. I'm worried that it won't, and this administration instills little confidence in me, but if, despite themselves, they are able to turn Iraq into a functioning democracy, we must acknowledge what an incredible potential for good that is. For my part, I have long worried that any good that comes from the promotion of democracy in Iraq will be outweighed by the bonanza of terrorist recruiting caused by the war (and debacles like Abu Ghraib). I think the verdict is very much still out, but I'd like to see more liberals remain open to the idea that some good may come of this.
The problem we have is reconciling our strong belief that Bush should be held accountable for his deceptions and incompetence, while at the same time being open to the posibility that his policy, had it been pursued honestly and competently, may actually have been the right one. What a pity that boldness (an admirable quality) is so often accompanied by extreme hubris and disdain for process.
This is far from my last word on this topic. Stay tuned.
On the one hand, this War has been pursued dishonestly from the beginning. The Bush adminstration clearly knew that Iraq had no direct connection with Al Queda or 9/11. But they also knew that such distinctions were largely lost on the American public. They capitalized on this ignorance and the fear that followed 9/11. They hyped Iraq's nuclear threat beyond the intelligence they had, scaring people with images of mushroom clouds. They used speech after speech to subtely link Saddam to 9/11, going out of their way to foster the misconception that he was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. They were grossly negligent in planning for the war and its aftermath. As diplomats, they were arrogant and incompetent. They demonstrated repeatedly that they did not fully grasp the nature of the war of ideas we are fighting, providing islamic extremists with endless recruiting material. When things went wrong, they refused to acknowledge even the most obvious errors, going as far as promoting those who made the worst mistakes and firing those who expressed disagreement. In short, in the lead up to war the Bush Administration demonstrated remarkable hubris and inexcusable disdain for democratic processes and principles. Since the war began, this administration has demostrated a total lack of competence and has refused to acknowledge any mistakes or hold anyone accountable.
Given all this, it's understandable why many liberals find it so hard to approach the Iraq war objectively. But being a true liberal means being empirical and fair. Let's start by acknowledging that despite the deceptive way in which this war was "sold" to the country and the world, the architects of this war genuinely believed that it was in our country's best interest and that it would help the Iraqi people. This was never about oil or empire. The people responsible for this war genuinely believed that they could reshape the Middle East through military force; that they could create free societies, spread democracy, and ultimately undermine the root causes of islamic terrorism. Call that naive, perhaps, but not sinister.
We must also acknowledge that, however inartfully it was brought about, a seed of democracy has been planted. Saddam is gone, and there is now at least some hope that a democracy will grow in Iraq. I'm worried that it won't, and this administration instills little confidence in me, but if, despite themselves, they are able to turn Iraq into a functioning democracy, we must acknowledge what an incredible potential for good that is. For my part, I have long worried that any good that comes from the promotion of democracy in Iraq will be outweighed by the bonanza of terrorist recruiting caused by the war (and debacles like Abu Ghraib). I think the verdict is very much still out, but I'd like to see more liberals remain open to the idea that some good may come of this.
The problem we have is reconciling our strong belief that Bush should be held accountable for his deceptions and incompetence, while at the same time being open to the posibility that his policy, had it been pursued honestly and competently, may actually have been the right one. What a pity that boldness (an admirable quality) is so often accompanied by extreme hubris and disdain for process.
This is far from my last word on this topic. Stay tuned.
posted by A.L. at 11:03 PM
1 Comments:
I completely agree with you; I believe that being a liberal does not merely entail the opinions we hold, or the choices we make.
We call ourselves liberals because we also include the reason behind these beliefs/choices, thus believing in fair hearing for all ideas.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home