ABU GHRAIB

A reader rightly points out that I need to comment on the reports on the Abu Ghraib calamity that came out last month. Long ago, when it became clear that Don Rumsfeld had nixed expanding interrogation techniques at AG, I felt enormous relief that nothing too nefarious had gone on in the Pentagon. Knowing Rummy, I had found it very hard to believe that he would have sanctioned anything like what went on in AG. And that turns out to have been the case. But the reports rightly point out that confusion at the top about what was sanctioned and what wasn’t did indeed contribute to the p.r. debacle and the unforgivable abuse itself. Not malevolence nor malfeasance, just the same incompetence that under-manned the occupation and made a difficult situation unmanageable. Bush and Rumsfeld do bear responsibility for that, as Rumsfeld conceded in front of Congress. Bush, of course, has yet to accept responsibility for what went wrong. He very rarely does. The deeper question, however, is: do we have confidence in this administration’s competence (not will) to conduct the war effectively and bring it toward victory? There are plenty of arguments on both sides of that question. Waging war requires both determination and effectiveness. Bush has a lot more of the former than the latter. And, if we want to avoid more Abu Ghraibs, that counts.