Month: April 2003

John Keegan, arguably the best military historian around, has the goods on the bizarre campaign now concluding. Why did Saddam do everything wrong in the defense of Iraq? How was victory so swift? It seems to me that in retrospect, when this war is properly analyzed and chronicled, it may well be that the question is far less: “What did the allies do wrong?” than “What did Saddam do right?” Money quote:

Because the war has taken such a strange form, the media, particularly those at home, may be forgiven for their misinterpretation of how it has progressed. Checks have been described as defeats, minor firefights as major battles. In truth, there has been almost no check to the unimpeded onrush of the coalition, particularly the dramatic American advance to Baghdad; nor have there been any major battles. This has been a collapse, not a war.

Keegan is particularly brutal about the Western media’s coverage. Their spin was almost as pathetic as Saddam’s defense. And just as effective.

From the Guardian no less:

Many local people seemed genuinely happy to see the army rolling past, laughing and joking even as they were stopped to be frisked at the checkpoints into and out of the city. A jubilant crowd of about 100 Iraqis surrounded two British tanks sitting side by side near a mural of Saddam Hussein and started cheering the soldiers inside and giving the thumbs-up sign. Soldiers were handed pink carna tions and yellow flowers. Abdul Karim, an English teacher, was wandering through the city late in the day. He was standing opposite a burning building, painted with the inevitable portrait of Saddam He said it was used as a food warehouse by the Ba’ath party and that it had been looted and set on fire. He said he had a BA in English. “It’s great, it’s great,” he said with an expansive gesture. “The Fedayeen have gone. They left on Saturday and Sunday. It is fantastic.”

One obvious point: if it weren’t for Bush and Blair, these people would still be in a living hell. But the U.N. would be happy.

THE ANTI-WAR MOVEMENT: It now commands 16 percent support in the population at large. Boomers, the group most likely to be seeing this war through the prism of Vietnam, now support it in greater numbers than any other age-group. Here’s an email from someone perhaps typical of his generation:

I am part of that baby boomer generation and like many I demonstrated against that war in Viet Nam. But unlike some I do realize it is not 1969 anymore. Viet Nam was a very long, costly and ugly war. The divisions did not come overnight and for many they will not go away. It is part of their identity, their very purpose in life. Many felt the same after the American Civil War. It took a generation then and it might take a generation now for enough time and distance to come about to see that war and its legacy in proper perspective. I supported the government in this endeavor for the simple reason that I am an American and I don’t like fascist dictators the likes of Saddam Hussein. They can call that simplistic, but then again so is their knee jerk anti Americanism. There is nothing sadder than an old hippie trying to regain his/her youth through the manipulation of others and at the expense of a suffering people they claim to feel sympathy for. I hate the destruction, but I also hate doing nothing while hundreds of thousands of people die. I guess some of my generation and the UN security council have no such qualms.

Has any large protest movement been this much of a failure so soon?

It’s his weak-spot. They don’t trust his tax cuts and they worry about the deficit. I guess I should put it on record that although I’m underwhelmed by the Democratic candidates in the field, I think the president is far more vulnerable in terms of re-election than some seem to think. Check out these poll numbers during a successful war. Not encouraging data among independents for the White House. Check out also the bonanza fund-raising among Democrats, especially John Edwards. In some ways, Bush may be more vulnerable the more successful he is in foreign policy. People may warm to a Democrat who promises them relief from the drama of the war on terror. Of course, the odds are still with Bush. And he shouldn’t take his eye off foreign policy. The war against terror is only near the end of its beginning. But he does need to address run-away government spending, boost his compassionate conservative image, and re-engage domestically. The odds are not that the economy is heading for a Krugman-like collapse. But it could well grow quite quickly without generating enough jobs to keep the unemployment level below 7 percent. That spells trouble for the incumbent.

A STORY OF FAITH: At a time when the church seems rudderless, it’s always good to hear stories like this one.

A novel way to read Eric Alterman’s blog. And no waste!

In France, they don’t just exclude Jewish speakers, they beat anti-war Jewish protestors with iron bars.

We should wait to see if this is confirmed. But it would be wonderful indeed if NPR broke the story about finding the first of Saddam’s chemical weapons.

“FREEDOM TODAY”: An Iraqi prisoner tells his tale.

POWELL VERSUS THE GERMANS: Wonderful take-down of an obnoxious German reporter by the secretary of state.

THE BEEB’S INQUISITION: Sometimes, the attempt to get people to pay for the BBC goes a little awry.

We’re in the presidential palace. This is getting to be a generals question in political science. Who actually wields effective power in Baghdad in the pre-dawn hours of April 7? I’m not sure what Hobbes would say right now: the Leviathan is at the gates, indeed inside the citadel, but it treads so lightly it is barely there. Maybe power shifts the minute a critical tipping point occurs in the assumptions of the population. Whom do they fear the most? Arresting: the moment when power changes hands. One day, someone will figure out when it happened. And they’ll probably be wrong.

NO U.N. CONTROL: The Pentagon and the British military liberated Iraq. They should both now govern it for the short-term. The notion that the U.N. should become immediately involved – except as a humanitarian adjunt to U.S.-U.K. forces – is a joke. I agree with William Rees Mogg in the Times of London this morning:

The Americans know that M Chirac double-crossed them over Resolution 1441; they know every detail of how and why he did it; they know what it has cost them in money and in lives. They will shake hands at photo opportunities; they will play the Marseillaise; they will drink toasts in mediocre champagne at diplomatic dinners; but they will be slow to forgive and they will never forget.

That is, indeed, the message that must be sent to Chirac, the Iraqi dictator’s chief sponsor. And if I’m not very much mistaken, it already has.

Paul Berman and Nat Hentoff make the critical arguments. Why haven’t more followed them?

BASRA FALLS: With minimal civilian casualties. Another huge victory after less than three weeks of war. The war-critics are now looking as beleaguered as the pockets of Ba’ath resistance.

VON HOFFMAN AWARD NOMINEE: “As the war drags on, any stifled sympathy for the American invasion will tend to evaporate. As more civilians die and more Iraqis see their “resistance” hailed across the Arab world as a watershed in the struggle against Western imperialism, the traditionally despised Saddam could gain appreciable support among his people. So, the Pentagon’s failure to send enough troops to take Baghdad fairly quickly could complicate the postwar occupation, to say nothing of the war itself.” – Robert Wright, Slate, last week.

“U.S. Army troops took control of this city revered by Shiite Muslims today, and once again drew cheers and thumbs-up accolades from thousands of smiling residents… Army officers hope that the relative ease with which Najaf and Karbala fell bodes well for their efforts to gain support from Shiite majority throughout Iraq. A gathering of senior Army officers on Highway 9 in the city late this afternoon drew an upbeat crowd of more than 100, who alternated expressions of appreciation with petitions for help. Among the shouts from the crowd:
‘Thank you very much, Mr. Boss.’
‘We love you United States.’
‘Saddam donkey.’
‘Night and day, no water.’
‘Hospital. No electricity, no food, no medicine.’
‘Very happy. I love you George Bush.'” – Washington Post, this morning.

BITTER, PARTY OF ONE: One of the things that people like me have long under-estimated is the legacy of Vietnam among the boomer generation. I wasn’t even in this country; and others in my under-40 generation in America also don’t get it. But for men like Howell Raines or Johnny Apple or others who command the heights of academia, Vietnam is still the prism through which they see everything. I’m not saying this isn’t understandable; and a sense of history is vital to understanding a chaotic war like the one we have just witnessed. But the bitterness can also cloud judgement. Just look at Allan Gurganus’ essay in yesterday’s New York Times Magazine. The man is still in shock. The visceral hostility he feels to the U.S. government, the Pentagon, or, indeed, any American authority figure stems in part from the experience of that war. I don’t think this is curable. In some ways, it’s pointless to rail against it. It’s just part of the psyche of a generation with enormous power – now, in part, the power to denigrate and undermine any real American military victory. Not all of this generation is hopeless, of course. Some are doing amazing work in this war even now. But for others, it will never recede. It’s their point of reference, their precious. And they will nurture it even more passionately if the world now proves them wrong.

More good news from Southern Iraq, where the Brits seem to be doing a fantastic job. One question: how did they manage not to collapse as a military force? After all, they allow openly gay soldiers in their units, thus undermining unit cohesion, destroying morale, wrecking troops’ privacy and making it impossible to fight. A miracle against all the odds, I suppose.

A WAR DIALOGUE: Wonderful series of emails back and forth between the editor of the Daily Telegraph, Charles Moore, and the editor of the rabidly anti-war Daily Mirror (of Pilger and Arnett), Piers Morgan. Morgan’s inability to see or think clearly has rarely been more brutally exposed.

A SUICIDE BOMBER: More evidence of Saddamite depravity.

CLIMATE CHANGE: So the Middle Ages were way warmer than our current temperatures. Must have been all those air-conditioners and SUV’s.

SONTAG AWARD NOMINEE: “On the separate question of whether Iraqi acts of war are on a par with those of the coalition, the answer is also simple. Ours are sometimes worse… We, by contrast, are invited to despise the independent al-Jazeera, condemned by Mr Blunkett as a Saddam tool, and soak up good news images. Ignore the nastiness and think instead of the brave ‘rescue’ of Private Jessica Lynch from the hospital ward where she was being treated with all available medical skill.” – Mary Riddell, shilling for Saddam’s thugs, in the Observer.