November 21, 2003
WHIPLASH WILLY AND REVERSIBLE ROBERT:
An Administration of One: Bush has made it clear that the only exit strategy from Iraq is a victory strategy, with victory defined as "democracy." (Robert Kagan and William Kristol, 12/01/2003, Weekly Standard)
WHEN GEORGE W. BUSH first entered the White House, the conventional wisdom was that his inexperience and lack of vision in foreign policy would be compensated for by his wise and experienced cabinet. This may or may not have been a reasonable view at the time. Right now, however, it is clear that the most visionary and, yes, the wisest and most capable foreign policy-maker in the Bush administration is the president himself. [...][B]ush has broken from the mainstream of his party and become a neoconservative in the true meaning of the term. For if there is a single principle that today divides neoconservatism from traditional American conservatism, it is the conviction that the promotion of liberal democracy abroad is both a moral imperative and a profound national interest. This is a view of America's role in the world that has found little favor in the Republican party since the days of Theodore Roosevelt. Reagan was a modern exception--the product, no doubt, of his own roots as a Truman Democrat--but this aspect of Reaganism was largely abandoned by Republicans after 1989. And so we are not surprised to see traditional Republican conservatives, of whom there is no more esteemed intellectual spokesman than George Will, now denouncing the supposed folly of such ambitious ventures. Nor are we surprised that in Bush's own cabinet, neither his secretary of state nor his secretary of defense shares the president's commitment to liberal democracy, either in Iraq or in the Middle East more generally. Indeed, the only thing that surprises us, a little, is the failure of American liberals--and European liberals--to embrace a cause that ought to be close to their hearts.
Liberals and conservatives alike these days seem willing to consign the Arab peoples to more decades of tyranny. "The West," argues Fareed Zakaria, "must recognize that it does not seek democracy in the Middle East--at least not yet." President Bush rejects this counsel. "In the West," Bush noted in London, "there's been a certain skepticism about the capacity or even the desire of Middle Eastern peoples for self-government. . . . It is not realism to suppose that one-fifth of humanity is unsuited to liberty. It is pessimism and condescension, and we should have none of it."
What has also become clear this past week is that Bush is determined to promote democracy in Iraq--and right now.
These two change their minds about W so often, even they must have to pick up that week's magazine to see whether they think he's wobbling or ascending Mount Rushmore at any given moment. Posted by Orrin Judd at November 21, 2003 8:29 PM
So true, talk about "fingers in the wind".
One has LoL.
Better that they spend some of their time praising Bush, than all of it bashing him.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at November 22, 2003 1:27 AMBoth Kagan and Kristol come off as "immediate gratification" junkies when it comes to the administration and their own foreign policy beliefs. They want it -- "it" being policies that mirror their own -- and they want it now, so that even the most slightly perceived deviation results in a temper tantrum in the pages of The Weekly Standard or on the panel of Fox News Sunday. Makes you wonder if Kristol ran Dan Quayle's office with the same sort of maniac-depressive attitude...
Posted by: John at November 22, 2003 8:59 AM