Fred Sneesby - Observations on Culture, Faith and Politics

Disappointing Democrats

January 20, 2007

The Democrats appear willing to accept failure for the United States in Iraq in order to ensure success at the polls for their party. In their eagerness to isolate George W. Bush and his questionable decisions, they are also isolating the last six years of Middle East policy from the last sixty years of US foreign policy. In doing so, they are making a fundamental mistake, a mistake that the country will pay for many times over in the years ahead if the Democrats succeed. We will repeat all of the errors we made since World War II. Principally, this means that we will settle for stability in a region where stability has brought oppression and poverty to millions who, as a result, are more than happy to sacrifice their lives for terrorist causes.

No one has to endorse blindly the course of action the Bush administration has taken in Iraq and the Middle East in order to hold the position that fostering moderate forces and democracy in the Middle East may be a wiser path to walk down than continuing to look the other way and to stick our heads in the sand while despots and extremists bully their own peoples and much of the rest of the world. The Democrats (and a few Republicans who are protecting their political rear ends instead of seeking the truth) love to portray the mess we’re in as well as the rise of terrorism on President Bush and his “failed foreign policy.” If you believe that then that crowd will also be sending you a flyer on a bridge in Brooklyn. Their pronouncements barely resemble the truth.

Dealing with the truth about the United States’ interests in that region and how to proceed into the next decades after so many administrations’ worth of poor choices is a much more difficult task than constructing a straw man to burn in the village square, which is what the Democrats prefer to do. It is almost insulting to hear their rhetoric. Besides wrongly quarantining Bush’s foreign policy from the rest of modern history, they stoop to playing word games like substituting “escalation” for “surge.” Do they think we are stupid?

They must, because they are also claiming that the President has disregarded the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, a group that was shrouded with an aura of infallibility larger than the Pope’s. The fact is that George W. Bush is implementing some of the Study Group’s recommendations. One of the mantras arising from the Study Group is that we need to seek a “political solution” to the Iraqi conflict instead of a “military solution.” Once again, common sense has fled. First of all, this is not an “either-or” proposition. It would seem self-evident that political and military initiatives could coincide and, indeed, complement each other. Military action even seems more urgent because parts of the country are completely unsafe for Iraqis. Areas are controlled by criminals or private militias who then strike out at the rest of the country and profit from the de-stabilization. Unless these are brought under control, the rule of law will never take hold and political solutions will never stand a chance. Trying to figure out exactly how to do that is much harder than just saying over and over again, “we need to seek a political solution.”

Really, though, none of Bush’s critics is actually trying to figure this out. In response to the assault he’s been under since unveiling his new plan, he simply invites the Democrats and their allies to tell him what they have in mind and exactly how that will solve the problems we face. I actually think he means it. No one really has an alternative, however, at least one that even hints at success or that contains any way for us to measure success. The Democrats seem to keep suggesting things that we have already been doing.

For example, they keep saying that we must train the Iraqi’s to do their own policing and battling. Well, I’m pretty sure we have been doing that for at least two years. They also say that we must involve other countries in the effort and often fault Bush for not doing so. No one seems to remember the overtures that were made to many of our allies in 2002 and 2003, overtures that were rebuffed. No one seems to notice what Secretary of State Rice has been doing these past several months in her discussions with other Arab states. (Secretary of State Rice is getting the slow version of the Democrats’ treatment of Clarence Thomas, another prominent black American who would not serve the Democrats’ interests.)

The one thing that some Democrats are saying that may be new and helpful is to tie our aid and efforts to Iraqi performance. I have always presumed that this has been the case and I have always presumed that the pressure the US government has been putting on the Iraqi government in terms of deadlines and benchmarks has been done privately since doing it publicly, as the leading Democrats would have us do, would be idiotic. Never presume, however.

The Democrat leadership will bring us nowhere except into the contributors’ lists of their presidential campaigns. Will some one or some group step forward to lead? Is there anyone on the political horizon who has not sunk into complete cynicism, as most politicians have, and who will seek and speak the truth? That is one reason for us regular citizens to stay politically active and – I am completely serious – to pray. To pray for some wisdom and some courage.