Tuesday, May 25, 2004
So, the President's speech. I thought it was well-written, but as everyone's been pointing out, it contained not a shred of new policy, save that we're going to tear down Abu Ghraib, a prison we helped make the symbol of oppression that it is.
Indeed, the common refrains were all there -- we must maintain our focus; the insurgency is nothing but terrorists, foreign fighters and Saddam loyalists; America will not be deterred. Regarding the handover, just as many questions remain as before. Who will make up the transitional government? How will we ensure the TG is perceived as legitimate by the Iraqi people? What happens the first time an Iraqi army battalion and an American army battalion want to pursue conflicting courses? How do we make certain that the democracy which arises in Iraq is liberal and protects individual freedoms? When do our troops come home?
It seems that President Bush hopes that by repackaging his old speeches into a coherent, organized plan, the world will be duped into thinking America has a comprehensive strategy for Iraqi democracy and subsequent American exit. The broad plan, as it stands, seems at least sound: involve the U.N., involve the Iraqis at every stage, phase over into democracy, etc. But the devil is in the details, as they say.
Regarding the insurgency, I don't know how much longer we can decry them as this malicious cadre of terrorists who hate freedom. The resistance began with Saddam loyalists and Al Queda elements, no doubt, but it has since blossomed to where there are overtones of both populist and nationalist revolution. Certainly the vast majority of Iraqis don't believe in the methods (and perhaps goals) of the insurgency, but riddle me this: if there is no popular support for the insurgency, how can they hide so effectively amongst the general population? Iraqis aren't giving them up, which is surely a metric of their appeal.
In essence, the speech tonight accomplished little. It is good, as Madeline Albright put it, that President Bush has decided its time to talk to the American people, but I would rather he come up with something substantive to say.
One last note: the line "...this vile display [re: Nicholas Berg] shows a contempt for all the rules of warfare, and all the bounds of civilized behavior," is not appropriate given the revelations surrounding Abu Ghraib these past weeks. You can't simply assume the moral high ground right now, Mr. President. That's a trust that we have to earn back.
Related Link
