Richard Clarke continues to dominate the news. His kiss-and-tell book, timed to coincide with his testimony before the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (better known as the “9/11 Commission”) will continue to see use as campaign fuel by Democrat partisans who seek to discredit President Bush.
I have not read Clarke’s book, and I do not intend to- I have many more important books to read. I view with great skepticism any man who publicly turns on those with whom he has served. There is a time and a place for memoirs about public service- the time and place are always after the administration in which the writer served has left office. As well, there is a time and a place for whistle blowing, but Clarke is not blowing a whistle so much as arguing policy differences. His publication of a book that attacks former colleagues, the release of which was timed to maximize the commercial advantage of his public testimony is bad form.
I listened to Clarke’s testimony before the 9/11 Commission and could not help but regret that he chose the low road on his way out of the Bush administration. His depth and breadth of experience in multiple administrations could provide the country with valuable anti-terror insight- too bad he was overshadowed by a partisan storm of his own making.
Clarke made one objectionable statement, echoing a Democrat sentiment that is a cliché, “… the reason I am strident in my criticism of the President of the United States is because by invading Iraq -- something I was not asked about by the commission, it's something I chose write about a lot in the book -- by invading Iraq the President of the United States has greatly undermined the war on terrorism.”
Democrats often assert that the liberation of Iraq has increased Arab hostility toward the United States and swelled the ranks of terrorist organizations. They reason that this is a setback in the war on terror. In fact, the liberation of Iraq, which is ongoing, is a necessary battle in the campaign for victory over Islamism. By freeing the Iraqi people from tyranny, rebuilding their infrastructure, helping them to install a representative government, and then pulling back as they take first steps as a free people, the United States will demonstrate a commitment to freedom for all people. This demonstration of commitment will not go unnoticed by Muslims, most of who live under varying degrees of tyranny.
What I have just described will not happen without significant setbacks. Iraq is a volatile combination of Shiite, Sunni and Kurd with much enmity between these groups. The Islamists understand the high stakes in play in the Iraq front and exploit religious and ethnic hatred for recruiting and operations. Nonetheless, if the United States stays the course, stability and prosperity will begin to fill the political and economic vacuum that is public life in Iraq today. In so doing, the Iraqi people will see and seize upon the opportunity of a better life for their children.
Clarke’s assertion that the liberation of Iraq undermines the war against terrorism is premised on the idea that no one in the Islamic world will notice or care that the United States, in ending Saddam Hussein’s reign of terror, has saved the lives of approximately ten thousand Iraqi political prisoners each year going forward. In fact, when it becomes impossible for hatred’s foot soldiers to insist that the United States is a permanent occupier of Iraq and is stealing Iraqi oil (in other words, when sovereignty is fully in the hands of Iraqis) our liberation of Iraq will begin to drive a wedge between Islamists and moderate Muslims throughout the world.
In the long term, the liberation of Iraq will prove invaluable in the war against terrorism. If the United States stays the course, continued diplomatic, economic and military pressure on multiple fronts, covert and overt, will result in change as radical as that in Iraq, in countries including Iran, Syria, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, etc. Each of these fronts will create circumstances that can be construed as setbacks in the war against terrorism, but war is about overcoming setbacks. Each of these fronts will benefit from the perception, held by ordinary Muslims as a result of our freeing Iraq, that the United States will act in their interests too.
Posted by publius at March 26, 2004 11:31 PM