Sunday, April 24, 2005
Simple Rules for a Strange War
It seems clear that we have won the first two major engagements in the poorly named war on terror, in Afganistan and Iraq, and these have created other less obvious successes throughout the Middle East. But the war is not over and it's useful to recap a bit and see what lessons can be learned.
This article by historian Victor Davis Hanson on the War on Terror restates the war as the struggle against Islamic fascism, the autocracies that aid and abet it, and the method of terror that characterizes it. He provides a good perspective on how we are winning and derives some basic rules to guide our actions in future conflicts. The article is worth reading in full, but I'll summarize the rules here :
"1. Political promises must be kept. Had the United States postponed the scheduled January elections in Iraq — once the hue and cry of Washington insiders — the insurrection would have waxed rather than waned.
2. Any warnings to use force — much less unfortunate unguarded braggadocio — should be credible and followed through. The efforts of the terrorists are aimed at the psychological humiliation and loss of face of American power, not its actual military defeat. Appearance is as often important as reality, especially for those who live in the eighth rather than the 21st century.
3. Diplomatic solutions follow, not precede, military reality. Had we failed in Afghanistan, Musharraf would be an Islamic nationalist today, for the sake of his own survival.
4. The worst attitude toward the Europeans and the U.N. is publicly to deprecate their impotent machinations while enlisting their aid in extremis. After being slurred by both, we then asked for their military help, peace-keepers, and political intervention — winning no aid of consequence except contempt in addition to inaction.
5. Do not look for logic and consistency in the Middle East where they are not to be found. It makes no sense to be frustrated that Arab intellectuals and reformers damn us for removing Saddam and simultaneously praise democratic rumblings that followed his fall.
In response, American policy should be predicated not on friendship or the desire for appreciation, but on what is in our national interest and what is right."
This article by historian Victor Davis Hanson on the War on Terror restates the war as the struggle against Islamic fascism, the autocracies that aid and abet it, and the method of terror that characterizes it. He provides a good perspective on how we are winning and derives some basic rules to guide our actions in future conflicts. The article is worth reading in full, but I'll summarize the rules here :
"1. Political promises must be kept. Had the United States postponed the scheduled January elections in Iraq — once the hue and cry of Washington insiders — the insurrection would have waxed rather than waned.
2. Any warnings to use force — much less unfortunate unguarded braggadocio — should be credible and followed through. The efforts of the terrorists are aimed at the psychological humiliation and loss of face of American power, not its actual military defeat. Appearance is as often important as reality, especially for those who live in the eighth rather than the 21st century.
3. Diplomatic solutions follow, not precede, military reality. Had we failed in Afghanistan, Musharraf would be an Islamic nationalist today, for the sake of his own survival.
4. The worst attitude toward the Europeans and the U.N. is publicly to deprecate their impotent machinations while enlisting their aid in extremis. After being slurred by both, we then asked for their military help, peace-keepers, and political intervention — winning no aid of consequence except contempt in addition to inaction.
5. Do not look for logic and consistency in the Middle East where they are not to be found. It makes no sense to be frustrated that Arab intellectuals and reformers damn us for removing Saddam and simultaneously praise democratic rumblings that followed his fall.
In response, American policy should be predicated not on friendship or the desire for appreciation, but on what is in our national interest and what is right."
