For the week of April 16 - 22, 2003

Building a road
out of the rubble

Commentary by ADAM TANOUS

---

The neo cons were right.

For those not calibrated to the current political jargon, that would mean the neo conservatives.

The neo cons are a group of leading voices—some in government, some not—who currently have significant political cachet. In government these would be people like Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith, Cheney and Rumsfeld—neither of whom by now need introduction. The out-of-government neo cons comprise people like Richard Perle, Kenneth Adelman, Henry Kissinger, Newt Gingrich and George P. Shultz.

The basic argument of the neo cons, who lobbied strongly for an invasion of Iraq, was that the war would be a matter of weeks—to use Adelman’s term in a Washington Post opinion piece, a "cakewalk." While I think that his choice of words is a little crass—especially from the perspective of those who died in the conflict—he was basically right. I personally thought it would take several months and turn into a quagmire. I was sure we would get sucked into the back alleys of Baghdad and then the chemicals and biological agents we’ve heard so much about would start flying. Which, of course, begs the question: Why didn’t he use them? I doubt it was his moral compunction. Anyone who sanctions murder and torture of the grisliest kind can hardly be worried about the morality of his actions in war.

In my own meager defense, Adelman, as a member of the Defense Policy Board, has access to classified information and I don’t. Which is the great rub of debating issues of national security. It is, to use another piece of hip jargon, an "asymmetric" debate. When not all the information is on the table, debate sort of sputters.

This was one of the difficulties of our diplomatic effort before the war. The administration strongly hinted that it had incontrovertible evidence of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. It was also evidence, unfortunately, that they weren’t willing to share with anyone outside a tight circle of power. Secretary of State Collin Powell made a valiant effort at the U.N., but it was obvious his boss and those in the CIA had him on a short leash when it came to hard information. Though Powell, himself, was very convincing, the slides and diagrams he was allowed to show were a little too vague and cartoonish for the skeptics to swallow.

So in the diplomatic end, the American public took a lot on faith, and it paid off.

Watching the Iraqis people storm the streets last week in jubilation, was moving, to say the least. It was as if the leaden atmosphere lifted; people could breathe again. To see freedom expressed in joyful faces is to learn all over again how precious and basic it is.

We are now in the midst of the gleaming moment, that instant between the destruction of a despot and the creation of a nation. It is obvious that the military was prepared, thought through their plan and executed it efficiently. The men and women on the ground won the war on two fronts. They were the ones who dodged the bullets, dealt with land mines and snipers and suicide bombers. But on another front, they won the bigger war of credibility and trust by the manner in which they carried out their orders. With few exceptions, the troops were humble in their conquest of a hated regime. They handled a profoundly difficult situation—the intermingling of civilian and military personnel—with more skill than one could be expected.

We are now, however, faced with a profoundly complex task: creating a nation from the rubble. At this moment in time, Iraq is a country with absolutely no infrastructure: no basic supplies like water and electricity, no police, no system of government, let alone a functioning one, no real health care system, no economy but for the black market. And, in a way, given the despotic nature of Saddam’s decades-long rule, the country really has no sense of itself. So much of its character—the voices of its people—was stifled for so long, it is hard to know who or what Iraq is.

And that’s why how we proceed from here is so critical for Iraq and for us.

In the first instance, how do we create a nation without the identifiable stamp of the U.S. on it? The country doesn’t even have a serviceable constitution, or body of law from which to proceed. Presumably we will be helping the Iraqi people create such a document and the governmental bodies that follow from it—judicial, legislative, and electoral systems. One can only hope the administration has a plan for establishing a new nation as detailed as for the military operation. But beyond a good plan, we need—as in the military operation—finesse in implementing it. The quickest way to create resentment in Iraq and in the Arab world in general would be to create a mini America in the Mid East. Certainly we should hope for and encourage a representative government, but it should be one that is distilled through the Iraqi culture. Which means that the governmental system and the leaders that emerge may not be ideal in our eyes. However, trying to influence too strongly that process will doom them and us.

Aside from the fate of Iraq, why does it matter how we proceed? Largely because most of the nations of the world—though put off by our bilateral action with Britain—are withholding judgement until a road out of the rubble is built. Is the U.S. just an arrogant bully out for oil, reconstruction contracts and to settle an old score? Or did we do all this to liberate a people, to save the world from weapons of mass destruction? I think the latter is probably true, but our task—since we didn’t do it before the war—is to convince the world it’s true now.

As much as everyone wants to get our troops out of there quickly, we would be better served to stay: to pour money and energy and thought into getting Iraq moving forward. Not only will our benevolent actions convince the world of our intentions, but also the manner in which we execute those actions is paramount. Oddly, the old standby virtues of humility and respect for others can go a long way in determining the success of our efforts. So far the military has done a remarkable job of waging a war while keeping those virtues in tact. As the rebuilding of the nation begins, the military will have less influence on the course of events and the political figures will have more. Let’s hope they can maintain that fine line between the benevolent nation of wealth and the overbearing parent.

Ultimately, where and how we walk that line will influence not only Iraq’s future but also the security of our own nation. It’s hard to imagine the spotlight shining any brighter on us. We have the opportunity to astound all those staring in or, conversely, to enrage them.

 

The Idaho Mountain Express is distributed free to residents and guests throughout the Sun Valley, Idaho resort area community. Subscribers to the Idaho Mountain Express will read these stories and others in this week's issue.