Articles by Gary Hart
Iraq: Now We Own It
Published on HuffingtonPost.com on December 6, 2006
Among the many inevitable outcomes of the unnecessary invasion of Iraq was the appointment of a commission of worthies assigned to work out how we get the hornets back in the nest we had kicked open. This was roughly the assignment of the Iraq Study Group (a.k.a. the Baker-Hamilton Commission) and they have done a reasonable job of trying to restore realism, as well as reason, to an Administration priding itself on pre-Enlightenment divine guidance.
History will long remember the startling quote from the Ron Suskind piece in the New York Times Magazine, October 2004: "This is not a reality based Administration; we create reality," or some such.
Whether President Bush is now up to accepting reality, especially a very bitter reality he has created, remains in question.
In summary, here is what the ISG proposes: American military forces should "cut and walk" outside Iraqi cities but not, for the time being, outside Iraq; their role should be to train and not to fight; we should talk to the Iranians and Syrians; we should explore a regional conclave to support nation-building in Iraq; and, perhaps most-importantly, we should reacquaint ourselves with the thorny Israeli-Palestinian conflict and pick up the heavy burden of pursuing peace so ardently avoided by the Bush government.
Here is what early summaries suggest that the ISG does not address: how long should a diminished number of U.S. forces remain in Iraq; whether we should negotiate directly with the Sunni insurgents; whether the Malaki government has the actual capability to quell sectarian violence; whether regional nations will help isolate and crush the jihadists; whether the majority Shiites will share power and guarantee a share of oil royalties to the Sunnis; and what role we can expect Syria and Iran to play in supporting a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians.
Despite the many blanks left unfilled, the ISG effort is a very large step in the right direction.
But, for all the foreign policy folderol we will hear in coming hours and days concerning the ISG report, it will be but sound and fury if President Bush does not experience a second born-again conversion. He has raised stubbornness to a high art, believing it to be evidence of strength. For him, ignorance is a form of conviction. Given his belief in divine guidance, it would help a bit if James Baker appeared before him as the Archangel Gabriel. But even for Baker, whom many in Washington seem to believe can walk on water, that is a stretch.
The ISG report, and others to follow, will do little to change the mind of a man who still thinks he was placed on earth for the evil hour of 9/11, who believes America is an Avenging Angel whose 21st century mission is to eradicate evil from the earth, and who, as Captain Ahab, willingly suspends the verities of the U.S. Constitution in the pursuit of his own White Whale.
The October Surprise
by Gary Hart Published on HuffingtonPost.com on September 23, 2006
It should come as no surprise if the Bush Administration undertakes a preemptive war against Iran sometime before the November election.
Were these more normal times, this would be a stunning possibility, quickly dismissed by thoughtful people as dangerous, unprovoked, and out of keeping with our national character. But we do not live in normal times. And we do not have a government much concerned with our national character. If anything, our current Administration is out to remake our national character into something it has never been.
The steps will be these: Air Force tankers will be deployed to fuel B-2 bombers, Navy cruise missile ships will be positioned at strategic points in the northern Indian Ocean and perhaps the Persian Gulf, unmanned drones will collect target data, and commando teams will refine those data. The latter two steps are already being taken.
Then the president will speak on national television. He will say this: Iran is determined to develop nuclear weapons; if this happens, the entire region will go nuclear; our diplomatic efforts to prevent this have failed; Iran is offering a haven to known al Qaeda leaders; the fate of our ally Israel is at stake; Iran persists in supporting terrorism, including in Iraq; and sanctions will have no affect (and besides they are for sissies). He will not say: ...and besides, we need the oil.
Therefore, he will announce, our own national security and the security of the region requires us to act. "Tonight, I have ordered the elimination of all facilities in Iran that are dedicated to the production of weapons of mass destruction....." In the narrowest terms this includes perhaps two dozen targets.
But the authors of the war on Iraq have "regime change" in mind in Iran. According to Colonel Sam Gardiner (author of "The End of the 'Summer of Diplomacy': Assessing U.S. Military Options in Iran," The Century Foundation, 2006) to have any hope of success, such a policy would require attacking at least 400 targets, including the Revolutionary Guard. But even this presumes the Iranian people will respond to a massive U.S. attack on their country by overthrowing their government. Only an Administration inspired by pre-Enlightenment fantasy could believe a notion such as this.
Embracing this reverie requires believing in the Iranian Ahmed Chalabi, or perhaps even Mr. Chalabi himself since he has been working both sides of the street in both countries for some time.
It does not involve much imagination to understand the timing. The U.S. is poised to adopt a Congressional regime change of its own in November. A political strategy totally based on fear can offer few other options to prevent this. Besides, occupation by Democrats of even one house of Congress in January would make this scheme more difficult (one would certainly hope).
Further, time for super-power military conquest may be running short in the emerging age of fourth generation warfare. "...the age of Western military ascendancy is coming to an end." ("No Win," Andrew Bacevich, The Boston Globe, August 27, 2006).
The consequences? The sunny neoconservatives whose goal has been to become the neo-imperial Middle Eastern power all along will forcast few. But prudent leaders calculate all the risks, and they are historic.
These include: violent reaction throughout the Islamic world; a dramatic increase in jihadist attacks in European capitals and the U.S.; radicalization of Islamic youth behind a new generation of jihadist leaders; consolidation of support for Hamas, Hezbollah, al Qaeda, and a rapidly spreading malignant network; escalating expansion of anti-American sentiment throughout the world, including the democratic world; and the formation of WWIII battle lines between the U.S. and the Arab and Islamic worlds.
In more rational times, including at the height of the Cold War, bizarre actions such as unilateral, unprovoked, preventive war are dismissed by thoughtful, seasoned, experienced men and women as mad. But those qualities do not characterize our current leadership.
For a divinely guided president who imagines himself to be a latter day Winston Churchill (albeit lacking the ability to formulate intelligent sentences), and who professedly does not care about public opinion at home or abroad, anything is possible, and dwindling days in power may be seen as making the most apocalyptic actions necessary.
