The US
Will Leave Iraq Next Year
by
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
Governments
have this thing about not admitting error. In a perverse sense,
this may be because honesty requires that they do nothing but. Faced
with the prospect of admitting that the entire enterprise of the
modern state has not done what it is supposed to have done (I'll
spare you a complete or even truncated list), they take the road
of the pathological criminal: insisting that they did nothing wrong
even though everyone in the courtroom even in the world
knows otherwise.
At
the same time, there are ways that governments concede that "mistakes
were made." One way is the pullout, such as is being discussed with
regard to Iraq. Sectors of the Bush administration are hinting that
it could come sooner rather than later, even as the neocons howl
and wail that success is only a nuclear bomb away. The neocons,
however, appear to have squandered their credibility and power.
This bow to reality by the Bush administration is all to the good.
You can't rule a country, much less bring it freedom and democracy,
from a foxhole. All you can do with safety is tunnel out.
The
first spoonfuls of dirt are already in evidence. Maj. General Charles
H. Swannack has said that he is ready to withdraw from Ramadi, a
hotbed of resistance. The idea is to turn over the whole city to
the Sunnis and stand around on the outskirts of town to make sure
that all goes well. On the way out, he said, the US will not "tolerate
attacks on coalition forces and people jumping for joy in the streets."
Yes, he
really said that.
US
officials can pout that the Iraqis are not ready for freedom, just
as the Soviets complained that the irascible Muslims of its far-flung
empire were not ready for enlightened communism. The bottom line
is that nobody wants to be ruled by martial law administered by
a foreign military occupation, no matter what ideological label
it claims as its rationale. It didn't work in ancient times and
it doesn't work now. Most people get it. Fat governments with too
many WMDs never do.
Some
predictions follow. The unworkability of the occupation and public
pressure will force the US to leave Iraq at some point in the next
year. The neocons will scream that the failure was due to doves
in the Bush administration. Bush himself will go down in history
as a dupe, or a tragic figure at best. Iraq will become decentralized
politically, intolerant religiously, and continue to be violent,
dangerous, and poor for many years. The ostensible head of the Iraqi
state will receive the grudging backing of the US because there
will be no choice. And the American people will forget about the
place, just as they have forgotten about Panama, Somalia, Haiti,
Bosnia, Libya, and all the other lucky beneficiaries of US bombs.
In
all the talk of the calamity of this war, never forget the broader
picture: what an incredible opportunity was squandered after the
end of the Cold War. The US had emerged as the universally acknowledged
ideological victor in that forty-year struggle. That the Cold War
was not actually an ideological struggle so much as a classic standoff
between two evil empires is irrelevant for understanding the implications
of this fact: totalitarian communism collapsed while the free economic
system of the market economy remained standing in total triumph.
The world was ready for a new period of genuine liberalism, and
looking to the US. On the verge of an amazing period of technological
advance, we were perfectly situated to lead the way.
There
had never been a time in US history when George Washington's foreign
policy made more sense. A beacon of liberty. Trade with all, belligerence
toward none. Commercial engagement with everyone, political engagement
with as few as possible. The hand of friendship. Good will. This
was the prescription for peace and freedom. It was within our grasp.
Our children might have grown up in a world without major political
violence. A world of peace and plenty. It could have been.
But
it was not to be, mainly because George W.'s father decided that
he wanted to go down in the history books for doing something big
and important. What else but war? The US was now the world's only
superpower and itching for some fight somewhere. It's a bit like
a playground filled with wimps and one boy with a black belt in
karate who never absorbed the lesson in how and where to use his
fighting skills. And then there was this oil-drilling dispute between
Iraq and Kuwait, and Bush decided to intervene. Twelve years later,
the US is still there, causing unrelenting havoc for those poor
people.
Oh
yes, there were many other wars in between: the ridiculously named
"humanitarian wars" of Bill Clinton, in which US troops went to
places where people were variously suffering, killed enemies, and
left people suffering even more. Each intervention cost the US more
than the last. Look through a list of countries where Marines have
been deployed since the end of the Cold War and you will see a list
of countries in which the US is hated and despised by the local
population. No, folks, this isn't an amazing coincidence.
This
short history leaves out 9-11, of course, but after two years we
are in a better position to assess that event realistically. It
didn't symbolize some amazing rise of a new totalitarianism in the
form of Muslim terrorism. It didn't signal the failure of American
isolationism, as the warmongers absurdly claim. It didn't portend
the need for the US to become the largest and most militarized global
government in the history of the world.
Instead,
it was a monstrous act of vengeance for US policies in the Gulf
region and the Middle East, and the whole world knew it. Americans
themselves, apparently unaware that their government had been working
to stir up as many enemies as possible for so many years, were the
only people on the planet who were shocked.
No,
"they" don't hate "us" because we are good. Mostly "they" like Americans
and our culture, our businesses, our land, our history. What "they"
hate is the US government because it is imperial, ham-handed, violent,
arrogant, hypocritical, and stupid. The Bush administration seems
to have set out to confirm this impression in every conceivable
way.
It
is never too late for a new beginning. Let us learn from the failure
of the war on Iraq. As the generals and would-be civilian dictators
crawl through the tunnels on their way back to DC, and watch from
this side of the ocean at what a mess becomes of Iraq, let them
all do some serious thinking about the role of the US in the world.
They claim they want to be a force for freedom. How can they do
that? By minding their own business and staying home. As a rule,
they should avoid bombing people. That's a good start. As a second
step, Washington's
Farewell Address should be required reading.
If
this ever happens, US officials may just may have to tolerate some
jumping for joy in the streets. And not just in Ramadi.
November
19, 2003
Llewellyn
H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him
mail] is president of the Ludwig
von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, and editor of LewRockwell.com.
Copyright
© 2003 LewRockwell.com
Lew
Rockwell Archives
|