Tuesday, May 11, 2004
A Win-Win Situation?
In his latest NYT Op-Ed, David Brooks argues that "For the Iraqis to Win, the U.S.Must Lose". He means that for the United States to leave behind a united and effective Iraq, the persons or parties that come to power in our wake must be seen to have thrown the Americans out. Brooks is right, but he could just as well have written "For the U.S. to Win, the Iraqis Must Win". For our job now is to simultaneously build up the credibility of Iraqis capable of governing the country and lay a basis for the restoration of the credibility of American and Coalition forces. In our discussions with past and present allies in the United Nations and NATO we must make clear that this is our course. And on the ground, we must keep sufficiently ahead of events that American troops can withdraw as needed without suffering serious defeat or causing unnecessary blood-letting on both sides. If our actions can be seen as part of an evolving master plan to restore sovereignty, then the end result will be understood in retrospect as a victory.
As Brooks pointed out in another recent column, the worst result of defeat in Iraq will be the loss to the world of an America willing to effectively confront new security and human rights crises for a generation. Regardless of what we might think of this Administration and its errors, this is not an outcome that anyone should welcome.
In his latest NYT Op-Ed, David Brooks argues that "For the Iraqis to Win, the U.S.Must Lose". He means that for the United States to leave behind a united and effective Iraq, the persons or parties that come to power in our wake must be seen to have thrown the Americans out. Brooks is right, but he could just as well have written "For the U.S. to Win, the Iraqis Must Win". For our job now is to simultaneously build up the credibility of Iraqis capable of governing the country and lay a basis for the restoration of the credibility of American and Coalition forces. In our discussions with past and present allies in the United Nations and NATO we must make clear that this is our course. And on the ground, we must keep sufficiently ahead of events that American troops can withdraw as needed without suffering serious defeat or causing unnecessary blood-letting on both sides. If our actions can be seen as part of an evolving master plan to restore sovereignty, then the end result will be understood in retrospect as a victory.
As Brooks pointed out in another recent column, the worst result of defeat in Iraq will be the loss to the world of an America willing to effectively confront new security and human rights crises for a generation. Regardless of what we might think of this Administration and its errors, this is not an outcome that anyone should welcome.
Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
