http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinion/columnists/steigerwal
d/print_411033.html


Hitchens:  'Fight them everywhere'
By Bill Steigerwald
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Saturday,  January 7, 2006 

One of President Bush's most reliable allies in  defending the war in Iraq
and the global war on terrorism is writer/pundit  Christopher Hitchens. The
Vanity Fair columnist and former socialist would  almost be a card-carrying
libertarian if it weren't for his hawkish,  interventionist foreign policy. I
talked to him by telephone from his home in  Washington, where he's starting
work on his next book, "God Is Not Great."  

Q: What's your assessment of Iraq? 

A: Well, it's a race between  the idea of federalism and democracy and the
ideas of partition and  theocracy, and the United States is on the right side
of the argument. There  are only three things that can happen in Iraq: One,
that it's ruled by one of  its three constituent parts (Kurdish, Sunni and
Shia), which in practice  means absolute rule by a minority of that minority,
of a kind that was  Baathism. The other is partition, where they just
separate and you get in  effect three states, one of which would probably be
invaded by Turkey -- the  Kurdish one; one of which might well become
dominated by Iran and the other,  I don't know, it would probably be
dominated by Saudi Arabia. The third  alternative is where all agree that no
one group, let alone any minority of  one group, can govern the country,
which means that they agree to some form  of federalism and democracy. And
though I don't think that's fated to happen,  I think there are a huge number
of Iraqis who want it. And as I say, I think  American policy is designed to
help that emerge. The other thing about Iraq  is that it is the chosen
battleground of the al-Qaida fundamentalists.  They've decided, as I think
they had after they were thrown out of  Afghanistan, to make Iraq the next
place they make a stand. So it's also a  test in that war. 

Q: A test for the United States or al-Qaida?  

A: A test for everybody. It's a test for anyone who is not indifferent  to
the idea of a country of the size and importance of Iraq  becoming
Talibanized. That is not America's sole concern. I would like to  think that
no one could view that with indifference. But an amazing number of  people do
view it with indifference and/or take the other side -- and I spend  a lot of
my time trashing them. 

Q: What's the biggest misconception  or myth or fallacy Americans have about
what is going on in Iraq? 

A:  To think our engagement with Iraq began in 2003 and that we had the
option of  not doing anything there and presumably should have exercised that
option.  The beginning of wisdom is the realization of responsibility. We've
inherited  responsibility for Iraq starting at least from the moment when
Jimmy Carter  encouraged Saddam Hussein to attack Iran, but perhaps earlier
than that in  the '60s when the CIA most certainly did help Saddam's wing of
the Baath  Party to come to power. ... We have to accept that a busted up and
screwed up  Iraq was in our future no matter what. 

Q: Does that mean you are of the  "We broke it, but we broke it a long time
ago school" and now we've got to  fix it? 

A: When I first heard the Pottery Barn analogy put -- I think by  that great
stateswoman Maureen Dowd -- I thought how irritating and how  trivial. But
then I thought, "You know what, by accident, she's got it  right." Because,
OK, "You break it, you own it," can be rephrased. It was  broken and we did
own it. And so everything has to start with that  recognition. ... The main
criticism that the neocons have, and I take more or  less their line on this,
is that all of this should have been taken care of  in 1991. They should not
have let Saddam Hussein survive his conquest of  Kuwait and his defeat there.
He should have gone down then and we should  never have tortured the Iraqi
people with sanctions for 12 years. 

Q:  Has the cost to America in blood, treasure and diminished domestic
liberties  been worth it? 

A: Well, I think in a way that's the wrong question.  Again, it suggests that
there was the alternative of not doing anything. But  of course, doing it
does not mean you have to listen to people's telephone  conversations. But
that is not a product of the war in Iraq, by the way.  That's a product of
Sept. 11. ... My view is this: If an al-Qaida member  knows something, I want
to know it too. ... The main point is that we are  engaged in a just war --
on the right side. 

Q: To be successful in  the long run, what has to happen in Iraq? Will it
only work if it's  federalized? 

A: I hope it's federal, not completely devolved. Obviously,  what was in the
front of everyone's mind when they did the constitution was  we're never
again going to have a centralized fascism as we had before, so  all the
emphasis is on devolution. 

Q: When should U.S. forces start  coming out? 

A: When the insurgency has been convincingly, militarily  defeated. The
stakes here are fantastically high. If we can prove that in a  really major
country, in the heart of the Arab and Muslim world, that  al-Qaida can be met
on the battlefield openly and isolated and discredited  and defeated and
destroyed, that's a prize really well-worth having. These  people are our
enemies. I don't believe the president is right in saying we  fight them
there rather than here, because that is a false antithesis. But I  think we
should fight them everywhere -- and we have no choice in the matter.  The
crucial thing is to press on to victory and make absolutely certain that  the
defeat is a humiliating one for them. ... When that's done, I think  we
should turn over the country to the Iraqis. The art and science of it is  to
be doing both things at the same time, because the point is, it's the  Iraqis
who are the victims of these people, not us.  






-----  






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian  
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to