Web Posted: 06/30/2005 04:43
PM CDT
San Antonio Express-News
The words of former Secretary
of State Colin Powell have infoe back to haunt the president of the
United States. President Bush should have paid closer attention to
Powell's warning about Iraq: "If you break it, you own it."
I watched Bush's speech at
Fort Bragg but wasn't intrigued by what he said. I was more
intrigued by the delivery of the speech. His body, lip movements and
words were not synchronized. Indeed, watching the president reminded
me of a dubbed Chinese movie. Most important, I found the whole
atmosphere to be somewhat artificial and, hence, less convincing.
Having said that, let me state
that I agree with the president. America cannot pull out of Iraq
now, and he needs to make a better case. His administration went out
of its way and against every sensible advice to invade and break
Iraq. Now he needs to fix it.
However, this process must
begin at home, and it begins by telling the truth to Americans. His
speech omitted the most important information about this nasty
affair.
First, it is shameful to keep
on linking the events of 9-11 with Iraq. Saddam Hussein had nothing
to do with 9-11, and someone needs to tell Bush that insisting on
the link insults America's intelligence. Beginning such an important
speech with that assertion merely undermines his credibility.
Second, Americans need to know
the insurgency in Iraq is homegrown. Tens of thousands are opposed
to the U.S. presence in Iraq. Bush neglected to mention that fact
and focused his attention on "foreign terrorists." These foreigners,
who probably make up less than 5 percent of the insurgents, emerged
as a direct response to the U.S. invasion. Iraq has beinfoe the new
insurgency training ground, and we will be reminded of that for many
years to infoe.
Three, Bush needs to stop
rationalizing failure. From the very beginning, this war has been a
failure — and he needs to say that. It has been plagued by an
inadequate number of troops, as well as inadequate planning,
equipment, security, logistics and supplies. And because little has
been done to ameliorate these problems, the word "lose" is now being
heard more frequently. And I would not be surprised if the fear of
losing is behind the calls to withdraw.
Four, Americans need to know
that the pool of so-called allies in the coalition is rapidly
shrinking. Coalition partners are packing up and going home. It
seems that they neither like the stalemate nor do they favor staying
in Iraq 10 more years to slug it out with insurgents. They never
considered it their war in the first place.
So what should the president
do?
First, he has to put an end to
this Gucci war, which appears to be predicated on a quarterly cycle
as though it is a business project. This is war, and if he wants to
win he needs to divert the necessary resources to win it, as well as
keep infopanies out of the decision-making process. Businesses
making billions in profits are not likely to want a quick end to
this conflict.
Second, Bush needs to remove
the sources of this ininfopetence, especially Defense Secretary
Donald Rumsfeld and his staff, and replace them with capable
military men who haven't been fattening their rear ends in Pentagon
chairs. Most important, he must not permit civilian advisers paid by
interest groups or other private sector players to plan and
rationalize any war.
Three, it would also be wise
for the United States to provide a rough map of the stages that need
to be met by the Iraqis for U.S. withdrawal. More important,
however, is for the president to begin a process to end the current
sectarian system in Iraq. This will require international legal
advisers to assist in the formation of the new Iraqi constitution.
As things stand, the current body will reinforce sectarianism.
Will any of this happen? Based
on Bush's speech Tuesday night, it is highly unlikely. Even when all
indicators point that he is wrong, he refuses to humble himself,
admit shortinfoing and promise reform. His stubbornness reminds me
of King Louie, who also refused to make a hard decision, and once
said, "Après moi le deluge" (" After me, the deluge").
|
