Thursday, October 19, 2006

COWBOY RHETORIC PAINTED BUSH INTO CORNER, WEAKENED NEGOTIATING POSITION

Pat Buchanan writes this week about something I have thought many times: that the "axis of evil" speech was bold, rallying, and patently stupid. First, because the three companies mentioned are not an "axis" by any rational interpretation; second, because it was needlessly aggressive; third, because it singled out three regimes and ignored others that were, should have been, or could yet make it onto the list; fourth, because it took a public position that was neither actionable nor sustainable; and fifth, because each bilateral situation is different, requiring its own goals, strategy, and process.

It violated at least four cardinal rules of negotiation: 1) Never issue an ultimatum prematurely, 2) never make a promise that you do not have the authority to make good on, 3) understand your adversary's motivations and how he is likely to respond to your proposals; and 4) always hold back options to use later in the negotation.

Between Sept. 11, 2001, and his State of the Union Address in 2002, George W. Bush had America in the palm of his hand. But in that speech, Bush blew it.

Singling out Iran, Iraq and North Korea as state sponsors of terror seeking weapons of mass destruction, Bush yoked them together in an “axis of evil” and issued this ultimatum: “I will not wait on events while dangers gather. I will not stand by as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world’s most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world’s most destructive weapons.”

Neoconservatives celebrated this bellicosity as neo-Churchillian. Yet all it accomplished was to fracture the U.S. and foreign coalitions that had united behind Bush.

As some of us wrote at the time, to call Iran and Iraq, mortal enemies in the eight-year war of the ’80s that took a million lives, an “axis” was absurd. Bush’s speech was a blunder of the first magnitude. First, he had no authority to attack any of those nations, as Congress had not authorized war. Second, he had neither the plans nor forces in place to do so. Yet he had put all three on notice this was what he had in
mind.

When the United States invaded Iraq, North Korea and Iran got the message. Both accelerated their nuclear programs. By issuing public ultimatums, Bush left these regimes no way out. Kim Jong-Il has openly defied the Bush Doctrine. Arguably the world’s worst regime has acquired the world’s worst weapon. Bush’s response? He went to the United Nations to plead for sanctions.

2 comments:

Tom said...

I think Bush’s mistake was naming the axis regimes assuming that Democrats would get behind winning the war. He didn’t take into account we’re living in a country where schools are more interested in the kid’s self-esteem than accomplishment. To win the war someone else has to lose it and that’s just plain mean. A united America behind Iraq would have given North Korea and Iran headaches, while a divided America gives them comfort.

Dude said...

W is basically HW: The Next Generation. His policy makers are all leftovers from the 41 administration, the last of the Great War wonks who soon gave way to Clinton and the Vietnam era intellectuals. Bush used *axis* to evoke WWII sentiment of an entire nation rallied towards a common cause.

The great lesson that 40 taught us was that the next threat would not be from any type of axis power but would be from disjointed rogue states which is proving prescient on Reagan's part.

We are involved in a conflict that cannot be won by storming beaches and taking islands. The best offense against terror is basically a good defense which sadly brings us closer to living in a police state than we would prefer.

I liked that Bush put governments on notice that they either help us fight terror or join the enemy list. It is notable however that when one of the so-called axis powers fell, the other two got nuclear awfully quick.

Personally, I don't care who else is nuclear so long as we have the capabilty to annihilate anyone who launches a first strike. Even a madman must recognize that a nuclear attack on America would be suicide and it is in the best interest of all nuclear powers to ensure that no rogues get ahold of any materials which could be traced back to them.

Post a Comment