Is Dick Morris floating an idea that may become the Kerry/DNC position on Iraq? While Morris is often dismissed as a denouement, if not joke, he is still one of the sharpest political operatives around. Morris is also the perfect focus group of one; the DNC can disavow his views and position theirs accordingly. I have never been convinced that his ties with Clinton are broken.
Morris' appearance on Fox yesterday and his current column offers Bush advice on disengaging from Iraq.
Bush will be in real trouble if the situation in Iraq deteriorates. The reported boast of one anti-American demonstrator that he and his ilk "cannot drive America out of Iraq, but we can drive Bush out of the White House, like we did to Carter" is not far-fetched.So what is Bush to do?
Procedurally, the June 30 deadline for handover of power to the Iraqi government looks like an essential element in the president's escape from political danger. But behind it must lay humility and a realization of our limited means and the even more attenuated patience of the American people.
We were willing to support Bush in Afghanistan and over the Patriot Act. We backed the invasion of Iraq and agreed that Saddam needed to be removed. Even when no weapons of mass destruction turned up, the American people still supported Bush.
But last week's polling suggests that Americans are not prepared to sacrifice their sons and daughters to assure democracy in Iraq. That nation, which has never known freedom, may or may not be able to achieve democracy. But Americans are not willing to bet our children on the outcome. Nor should Bush wager his presidency.
As long as Saddam Hussein and his Ba'athist Party are out of power - and do not return - the United States will have accomplished its essential objective in Iraq. Saddam is an evil man. His villainy, coupled with his access to oil wealth, made him a potent threat to peace and freedom. He had to go.
To make sure he remains out of power, we must keep a large garrison, safely ensconced at a secure base, in Iraq once we hand over power to the Iraqi Governing Council.
In effect Morris advises abandoning Iraq to civil war while establishing a "garrison" similar to Gitmo, aka sitting ducks in an angry Arab barrel. Should we betray the Iraqi people we have lost the best, and perhaps the last chance to influence generations of young Arabs, to turn them away from isolation and theocracy to self-governance and participation in the free world.
Morris continues :
But democracy may be a bridge too far in Iraq; even peace may be elusive. We must heed the lessons of Nixon's successful disengagement from Vietnam. As Nixon did, we must turn the war over to the locals, a process he called Vietnamization.
As today's news headlines demonstrates this has been a disaster for Vietnam's minority tribes.
HANOI, Vietnam - Vietnam's Central Highlands remained sealed off Monday by police and security officials following protests by hundreds of ethnic minority Christians over Easter weekend.Scores were arrested and injured when more than a thousand people took to the streets Saturday in Buon Ma Thuot, the provincial capital of Daklak, in what was supposed to be peaceful prayer demonstrations against religious repression and land confiscation. Most of the indigenous mountain tribes are Protestant.
[...]
Vietnam recognizes only a handful of state-sponsored religions and has clashed many times with Buddhists and Christians. International human rights groups allege some ethnic minorities have been persecuted for their beliefs and forced to publicly renounce their faith. The European Union and the U.S. State Department have criticized Vietnam for religious repression.
Vietnamization overlaid upon the Northern communist takeover produced the obvious result; a repressive majority regime. Should we adopt a similar withdrawal technique in Iraq a Shi'ite civil war ensues and a theocracy regime will take power in Iraq. The Kurds would demand and fight fiercely for independence, throwing Turkey into turmoil. Civil and territorial wars would roil Iraq and its neighbors. Ba'athists and weaponery would pour back into Iraq from Syria. A theocratic Iraqi government would be little more than Iran's puppet. Could Saudi Arabia withstand the internal pressures of a unified Iraq and Iran?
Morris is a clever campaigner and reader of popular sentiment, but his advice in this case is poisonous to the American body politic. There is no quick fix. I do not think Bush is considering such a scheme, it goes against his grain and he has surely internalized the failure of his father to take on the task in 1990. The reason Bush 41 didn't go to Baghdad was not because we couldn't win as easily as a year ago, but to avoid the situation with which we now grapple.
As a nation we have asked the Iraqi people to trust us to finish what we began a decade ago and we will stand by them. That we betrayed them in 1990 is a large part why they are fearful of aiding us in rooting out the bad actors and thugs, they do not believe we will stay the course. Why would Afghani's trust us not to do the same? The Arab world will not give western civilization another chance if we cut and run in Iraq and in effect we will have handed a small radical minority the tools to engage us in the next stage of their war, the decimation of the oil fields in order to cripple our civilization. Oh, I can hear the lefties sneering "See, I told you it was about oil"...but our society, comforts and very existence is supported by Mid-East oil, and that is an immutable fact.
What we have undertaken is the most important task since the post-WWII reconstruction of Europe and Japan. To view it through the prism of winning an election is not only exceedingly stupid, but dooms the next administration to chaos and even higher costs in American lives and perhaps the stability of our system for decades. As a nation we have always undertaken what is right, not what is easy. It's the best part of our character.
Cross-posted to The Command Post Op-Ed Page.