“Very interesting proposals”, said Pres. Bush, as if he was forced to shop
for a new suit. One reporter quoted Lawrence Eagleburger, a hawkish Bush41
Sec. of State saying that after the event when the group met with Bush, “I
don't recall, seriously, that he asked any questions.”

Did anyone else notice the ISG delivered its report on Pearl Harbor Day?
Most of the editorial cartoons I have seen focus on the Reality Check
message, but I thought it apt that one portrayed a group of grownups telling
a toddler-sized Bush, “First, take that off”, pointing to a Top Gun costume.

Here is as good a summary in less than 500 words as I’ve seen so far.
Following that, a collection of readings for your files. Soon, I’ll have a
collection of readings under the working title, ISG: Will Bush take the life
rope thrown to him or retreat further into his bubble? Paramedics are
standing by.

Then there is the other audience we should not forget, the Iraqi government,
who appear to have seen through the political theater and last but not least
all those people dying in Iraq, in uniform and civilian, paying the price
for arrogance, deceit, denial and incompetence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Iraq: We Now Own It
Gary Hart, Huffington Post, Dec. 06, 2006

“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.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-hart/iraq-now-we-own-it_b_35694.html
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-hart/iraq-now-we-own-it_b_35694.html>

120606 Sec. Baker and Congressman Hamilton appeared together on PBS Newshour
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec06/bakerhamilton__12-06.h
tml
<http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec06/bakerhamilton__12-06.
html>

WaPost’s Abramowitz and Wright describe the Iraq Panel’s Major Shift
proposal as "a stinging assessment of virtually every aspect of the U.S.
venture in Iraq and called for a reshaping of the American military presence
and a new Middle East diplomatic initiative to prevent the country from
sliding into anarchy."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/06/AR2006120600
419.html
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/06/AR200612060
0419.html>

Slate’s Philip Carter says The Iraq Study Group talked with Generals when
they should have talked with Corporals http://www.slate.com/id/2155105/
<http://www.slate.com/id/2155105/>

Slate’s John Dickerson boiled it down this way in The Message: what Baker is
telling Bush
"Study Group members aren't just prescribing a new Iraq strategy, they're
calling for a change in the way the Bush administration does business both
home and abroad."
"1. Cut the crap. . . .
"2. You can be tough and talk. . . .
"3. Bipartisanship has to mean something."
http://www.slate.com/id/2154987/nav/tap1/
<http://www.slate.com/id/2154987/nav/tap1/>

NY Daily News’ John Haznet Hawks meet to lick their wounds: after receiving
the ISG report in the morning, Pres. Bush met with 14 avid war hawks from
Congress that afternoon to go over the report together, described by a
source as a group therapy – or intervention.
http://www.nydailynews.com/12-07-2006/news/wn_report/story/477890p-402057c.h
tml
<http://www.nydailynews.com/12-07-2006/news/wn_report/story/477890p-402057c.
html>

WaPost’s Kessler and Ricks The Realist’s Repudiation “The Iraq Study Group
report might well be titled 'The Realist Manifesto.'"
"From the very first page, in which co-chairmen Baker and Hamilton scold
that 'our leaders must be candid and forthright with the American people,'
the bipartisan report is nothing less than a repudiation of the Bush
administration's diplomatic and military approach to Iraq and to the whole
region. . . .
"Overall, it strongly suggests that Pres. Bush, VP Cheney and Sec. of State
Rice have bungled diplomacy in the region with unrealistic objectives and
narrow strategies. . . .
"The report's description of the violence in Iraq, which amounts to an
attack on the administration's understanding of the facts on the ground,
will likely set the new baseline for how the Iraq conflict is portrayed. . .
.
"The report is replete with damning details about the administration's
competence in Iraq. It notes, for instance, that only 6 people in the
1,000-person U.S. embassy in Baghdad can speak Arabic fluently, and recounts
how the military counted 93 acts of violence in one day in July when the
group's own examination of the numbers found 1,100 acts of violence. 'Good
policy is difficult to make when information is systematically collected in
a way that minimizes discrepancy with policy goals,' the report says."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/06/AR2006120601
482.html
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/06/AR200612060
1482.html>

SF Chronicle’s Carolyn Lochhead  "Naked reality came crashing down on the
Bush administration Wednesday as the Iraq Study Group issued its
long-awaited recommendations in a last-ditch effort to stave off a
'catastrophe' in Iraq and the Middle East.
"Unlike the posturing and obfuscations that the administration and many in
Congress have engaged in since the war began more than 3 1/2 years ago, the
elder statesmen of the bipartisan commission spoke with frank clarity of a
'grave and deteriorating' situation and an arduous path forward that could
yet fail."
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/12/07/MNGH6MR3171.DTL
<http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/12/07/MNGH6MR3171.DTL>

NYT’s David Sanger Panel Urges Basic Policy Shift: "The detailed
prescription called for much more aggressive diplomatic efforts in the
Middle East than the Bush administration has been willing to embrace. Its
calls for reconciliation and reform in Iraq and an overhaul of the American
military role would also mark major departures in the American strategy. . .
.
"What played out on Wednesday morning, from the White House to Capitol Hill,
was a remarkable condemnation of American policy drift in the biggest and
most divisive military conflict to involve American forces since Vietnam. .
. ."The panel was careful to avoid phrases and rigid timelines that might
alienate the White House. But the group also clearly tried to box the
president in, presenting its recommendations as a comprehensive strategy
that would work only if implemented in full."
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/07/world/middleeast/07baker.html
<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/07/world/middleeast/07baker.html>

The conservative response found in FOX News’ comments are that, the Gates’
nomination and ISG report signal a return to the “old guard’ Bush41
worldview and the abandonment of the neoConservative Bush Preemptive
Doctrine. Some believe Bush will not turn back on his oft-stated positions,
others take a ‘wait and see’ stance. While there is a willingness to blame
the failure of the Iraq war on Rumsfeld’s management of it, there is little
recognition of the failed motives that led to disastrous consequences or
questioning the end justifies the means subterfuge.

New Bush Advisors Raise White Flag in Middle East
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,229159,00.html
<http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,229159,00.html>

The LA Times also surveyed conservative reactions in Return Fire From the
Right:
Rush Limbaugh reportedly referred to the ISG as the Iraq Surrender Group,
Bill Bennett ranted that it was the worst example of arrogance he’d seen.
“The commission's report depicts Iraq as a country sliding into chaos,
saying conditions are "grave and deteriorating."  Many conservatives agree
with that assessment. But the report's other findings and recommendations,
which declare the approach they have backed for nearly 4years all but
bankrupt, clearly struck a nerve with the most ardent supporters of the war.

That diagnosis has compounded the pain for conservatives who saw voters turn
control of both chambers of Congress over to Democrats last month, largely
because of mounting frustration with the war in Iraq.

Conservatives were particularly incensed at the study group's recommendation
that the United States engage Iraq's neighbors, including Iran and Syria, as
part of a broad new diplomatic push to enlist other countries, even those
that see themselves as enemies of the United States, to try to solve the
Iraq problem. That advice is particularly difficult to swallow for
neoconservatives and others who believe US diplomacy should be grounded in a
moralistic view of the world, as opposed to the more pragmatic and
compromising "realist" approach championed by the ISG’s most prominent
members.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-right8dec08,0,1606570.s
tory?coll=la-headlines-frontpage
<http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-na-right8dec08,0,1606570.
story?coll=la-headlines-frontpage>



_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to