Neo-Cons "Out?" Realists "In?"
realisticforeignpolicy.org
Written by Leon Hadar
Tuesday, 13 January 2004
American Pundits have been speculating recently that the neoconservative intellectuals who were the driving force behind the Bush Administration’s Iraq adventure, its alliance with Israel’s Likud government and the ambitious U.S.-led Democratic Empire project, are being forced to play defense these days in the bureaucratic-political game in Washington.
Indeed, the grand designs that the neocons had cooked up in their Washington think tanks, and the expectations raised by the editorials published in their glossy magazines--that American would be welcomed as "liberators" in Iraq, that Mesopotamia would be transformed into a liberal democracy and that it would be become to be a model for the entire Arab Middle East--are proving to be nothing more than intellectual fantasies. According to press reports, the escalating attacks by insurgents against U.S. troops have forced the Bush Administration to back away from several of its more ambitious initiatives to remake Iraq’s political and economic system and to accelerate the timetable for ending the civil occupation of that country. Hence, the Americans have dropped plans to privatize Iraqi’s state-owned businesses and to write a constitution before a transfer of sovereignty.
Moreover, the demands by the Kurds in northern Iraq for the creation of a semiautonomous governing body to represent them and the expectations that a general election in the country would bring to power Shiite Islamic figures hostile towards the West, suggest that Iraq could be drawn into a bloody civil war and be torn into three separate mini states, representing the Arab Shiites, the Sunni Arabs and the Kurds.
The mess that the neocons, led by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, have created in Iraq explains the reemergence in Washington of the Realpolitik types that had played the leading role in the making of foreign policy of the Elder George Bush. "The grown-ups are being recalled to clean up the put things back in order," is the way one Washington "insider" puts it, referring to the decision by the White House to send former Secretary of State James Baker on a diplomatic mission to persuade America’s allies to agree to forgive tens of billions of dollars of Iraq's foreign debt.
Another foreign policy "realist" who came back to Washington is former U.S. Ambassador to India, Robert Blackwill, who has been asked to serve as the National Security Council's (NSC) Coordinator for Strategic Planning, with his chief responsibility being U.S. policy in Iraq. There are also some indication that the Iraq’s Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) chief, Ambassador L. Paul Bremer, has been distancing himself from the neoconservative cadre in the administration. At the same time, Wolfowitz is planning to leave the administration and return to academia early next year, according to Newsweek magazine.
But the collapse of the neoconservative project goes beyond Iraq. After all, the pundits from the American Enterprise Institute and the Weekly Standard, and their ideological allies who now dominate top foreign policy jobs in the Pentagon and the Vice President’s office, have proposed that 9/11 and the ensuing war on terrorism would permit the United States to formalize its dominant position around the globe. Hence, the establishment of the Democratic Empire in the Middle East would lay the foundations for a global imperial scheme in which U.S. military power would leave other players, ranging from "rogue states" like North Korea and Iran, to major powers like the European Union (EU) and China, with no choice but to bow to American dictates. Even before 9/11, the neocons were arguing that Washington should adopt a strategy of "containing" China and forcing it to accept the reality of an independent and democratic Taiwan.
But the reality is turning out to be quite different. Just recently, President Bush rolled out the red carpet in Washington for Chinese prime minister Wen Jiabao and warned Taiwan to refrain from antagonizing Beijing by challenging the "One China" policy. China has also been playing a leading role in a multilateral effort to diffuse the North Korean nuclear crisis. And a similar multilateral strategy has been advanced by Washington in dealing with Iran’s nuclear ambitions. That is, when it comes to the other two members of the "Axis of Evil" President Bush has rejected the neoconservative confrontational approach. Or, to put it differently, the White House is recognizing the limits of the U.S. military and is not prepared to execute a "regime change" in Tehran, Pyongyang or Damascus.
And while the neocons are "spinning" the recent move by Libya’s Muhammar Khaddafi to open its weapons-production facilities to international inspections, that development should be regarded as just another example of the Bushies adopting a more realistic foreign policy by agreeing to make a deal with a military dictator committed to radical Arab nationalism.
Against the backdrop of the earthquake in Iran, the Bushies have been sending signals that they were ready to pursue a policy of détente with the fundamentalist Islamic leaders in Teheran. In short, the model of military confrontation that was employed in Iraq (and Afghanistan) is turning out to be the exception to the rule. Diplomatic engagement is the norm for advancing U.S. security interests abroad.
But those elements in the Bush Administration and Congress who are encouraged by the signs that the White House is re-embracing a more realistic approach to world affairs recognize that there are powerful forces in Washington, including the neoconservative officials in the Pentagon, who will resist the new trends.
Indeed, the neocons are not "out" yet. They are certainly starting to lose some of the political battles in the U.S. capital. But the only person who could strike a real and final blow to their influence in Washington is the occupant of the Oval Office. Whether he decided to do that would be the most important move he will make in 2004, and one that could determine his chances to get to spend four more years as President.
_____________________________
Leon Hadar is a research fellow in foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute and a member of the Coalition for a Realistic Foreign Policy. |
