Yes, I told you that the light goes up and down. Don't you notice how the wheel goes round?*





Winners and Losers after the break. Add your own. Or tell us where we blew it.

Read more »

Location: Kalorama, Washington, D.C.

The Occasion: A Book Party:Fareed Zakaria's Mom's Guide To Dangerously Safe Ethnic Recipes.

(Background Muzak mixes with DJ Lester Lanin mix. Over by the dessert tray Michael Beschloss and Andrea Mitchell chat - Mitchell maintains one eyeball on her husband Alan Greenspan off in the distance regaling Bo Derek with Vietnam era monetary policy jokes.)
---------------

Michael Beschloss: Mmmmm. This sorbet is delicious, Andrea.

Andrea Mitchell: Not nearly as delicious as Maureen Dowd's amaaaaaaazing take down of Barack Obama the other day.

Michael Beschloss: I bet that did NOT please Mrs. Obama. Betty Ford's dentist once told me . . .



Andrea Mitchell: Meow! Mrs. Obama will have to learn real fast. My money is on MoDo!

Michael Beschloss: Aside from providing some critical feminine ballast to the NY Times Op-Ed page, Dowd's signature wit and her Colleen smile are priceless treasures that belong to all of us. This reminds me: Mary Todd Lincoln's proctologist once held a seance at Blair House and ....

Andrea Mitchell: Modo is amazing - Maureen's only serious competition would be (air quotes) “Hefty Bags.” - Seriously. Have you seen ....

Michael Beschloss: Andrea! “Hefty bags?” Hmm. Maureen is getting older - perhaps - but isn't everyone? Some sagging is inevitable , but I think calling them hefty bags is

Andrea Mitchell: Michael! I wasn't talking about MoDo's breasts! I was talking about ....

Michael Beschloss: Andrea! I NEVER thought you were talking about her breasts or her behind - I thought you were making fun of her eye - you know the TV make up runs and it happens to everyone...

Andrea Mitchell: No - neither. (laughs) I was referring , of course, to Tom Friedman's brilliant “Iraqis are like Hefty Bags” analogy the other day. Didn't you ...

Michael Beschloss: Oh My God - Remind me to fire my intern researcher tomorrow. I missed that column. I thought Tom was reporting from Katmandu - I had no idea he was in Baghdad. At least , not as we speak ...

Andrea Mitchell: He's not - actually he'll be here any minute now - I was . . . just think you'd better read it quick - Tom pointed out the weird similarities that Iraqis have with Hefty Bags..

Michael Beschloss: Jackie once found a Hefty bag full of gasoline drenched Japenese Yen in one of Aristotle's yacht's off the coast of Cyprus . This reminds me something Caroline told me the other day...

Andrea Mitchell: Hold that thought, Michael - Tom just arrived - I have to greet him quickly or he might turn against Alan. Bye Bye.



The actual Hefty Bag analogy from the World's Most Important Columnist after the break . . .

Read more »

More substantive comment to come later. In the interim, try this consensual reality mixer. A reality mixer is a M. Shufflebottom concept. Next time maybe we will replace the video with shots of the Maximum Leader's ascent and nadir as the backgrounds. With Condi and Kristol twittering as the AgitProp cocktails. Really, the choices are endless. Russert would get props as a media court eunuch (with our member CATO's priviso attached).




Our Kaiser Wilhelm, sinking in place, dragging us down with him.



Tags: Bush, Iraq, Neocons, Surge

Today's column by Arnaud de Borchgrave explains the larger geo-political context of escalation in Iraq. We've heard much the same kind of rumblings as well.

Mr. Bush sees himself as a lone Winston Churchill figure from the 1930s railing against his somnolent colleagues as they appeased Adolf Hitler. And like Churchill at the end of World War II, he was not elected to preside over the dissolution of the American empire.

Reinforcing Mr. Bush's gut feeling recently was a paper by Gen. Chuck Wald, recently retired as EUCOM commander, and Chuck Vollmer, President of VII Inc, which does strategic analysis for the Pentagon. “With the entry of Iran into the equation,” they wrote, “the next phases of Operation Iraqi Freedom could possibly include... a major invasion of Iran and pro-Iranian forces against Western forces in the region and Israel, and/or a global energy crisis.

”Rather than planning withdrawal from Iraq,“ says the Wald-Vollmer paper, ”we may be better served to plan for repositioning in this strategically important region. While withdrawal may be necessary in Iraq, withdrawal from the region would precipitate a global balance-of-power shift toward the Iran-Russia-China axis, which would be very detrimental for the energy dependent West.“

Indeed, this is reminiscent of the ”Battle of Iraq“ in the ”Twenty Years War" we saw on countless PPT presensations, not only from Office of Force Transformation but from people with real missions and real budgets. Escalation now in Iraq without a clear national consensus on that course of action to prepare the ground for offensive action against Iran is the divorce of (harebrained) strategy from national will. Even the expansion in the active military would not be sufficient to occupy amd pacify Iraq, Iran and Aghanistan, let alone Syria too. Such a wider regional war is an inevitability of war with Iran. We've made some comments about Bill Odom here and there, but we think he is largely correct that a flawed strategy going in almost always dooms the value of operational successes. Strategies can be adjusted to re-align for victory condiitons. And certainly, until recently in America, strategies were not immutable.

But the first easy steps are over. The very hard path of a war of civilizations looms ahead. And once again the nation is being launched onto a course of action in pursuit of goals and objectives that have not been disclosed.


Yesterday we said that we would offer an explanation for how Neocon radicalism wins a throw of the dice yet again. We hope to finish it shortly. Even today there is a curious timidity and intellectual exhaustion from from the charred remains of the Establishment foreign policy community. After six long years fo disaster, with the nation behind them, the ISG and 'realism' had the shotest lived shelf life. Look for more on this soon.

Tags: Iraq, Neocons, War, Jim Baker, Iraq Study Group

Give Peace a chance: Surge!

A decisive moment in world history is at hand. If the United States, Britain and their allies fail in Iraq the result will almost certainly be a regional maelstrom. If the coalition succeeds, then the West will regain the initiative against radical Islam in Iran and throughout the Muslim world.
The current trajectory in Iraq is poor: rising sectarian violence threatens to rend Iraqi society and destroy America’s will to continue the struggle . . . [t]he choices are bleak. . .

Kagan channelling VDH sans cheap hoplite reference. How is it, after the disasterous last six years, the Neocons are granted such megaphones and impact? Last month, the death knell for the Neocon oeuvre was everywhere. Here is Tweety, comically late coming forward but nimbly tacking with the wind in November 2006: All [the neoconservatives] care about is ideology,“ complained MSNBC's Chris Matthews a few months ago. ”The president bought it hook, line and sinker." Stop the presses!

And then on Fox News Sunday we see Kristol add:

There's no point having a short term surge. Especially, if it's proclaimed ahead of time that it's just short term. Then [the enemy] goes into hiding for 3 or 6 months.

We pull back and we're in the same situation. Bush will commit — I believe, when he speaks in a couple of weeks — to doing this. That this is a strategy for victory and that he's willing to do this for the remaining 2 years of his presidency. This is a remarkable moment, though. I came to Washington 30 years ago. How often does a president go against — what Juan referred to — the wider consensus in this town, 'the military solution isn't possible?' It's a very broad consensus of the establishment and, I think, that's why there's so much anger among the establishment-types. 'Gee. The Baker-Hamilton Commission pronounced its verdict. And how dare the president make up his own mind and decide that he's not just going to just gracefully accept defeat with this nice bi-partisan patina of the Baker-Hamilton Commission. How dare he decide that we might win in Iraq.

A discredited Neocon policy/pundit eilte. A national referendum on Nov. 7th. against the Administration. Yet a defiant escalation in the war. When even Kissinger must have told Dubya that National Strength = Power x Popular Will. Bush the 'Neocon in Chief" is ably laying the table for McCain the Successor. Iraq may not even be at the end of the beginning.

(More tomorrow on why this happened)

Tags: Neocons, Kagan, Kristol, Iraq, War

Global Paradigms offers the funniest take on what every desk bound chicken hawk uses for a 'picker-upper': SURGPILL. To put that extra jaunt in the step of every would be World Historical Hero. Here's the test: while reading it, see if Global Paradigms doesn't play it exactly like the ads pummelling us over dinner. The graphics are great, too. “Let's Surge!”

And while you're at it, check out “The Right Men, The Wrong President”, also by Global Paradigms. A snippet:

So why do natural winners like Mr. Baker and Mr. Paulson end up looking now like losers, if not whiners? The fault is not in our two stars – but in their boss in the White House. Mr. Bush remains committed to a global strategy that continues to see the US as a hegemon in the Middle East and East Asia in which other regional and global actors, like China or Iran, need to be contained and constrained.

If America faces counter-pressures around the world, it only needs to cut its losses, buy some time and wait for an opportunity to push “forward.” Under such conditions, negotiations with some players – like Iran (or North Korea) – are seen as counterproductive. Negotiations with other players like China become ad-hoc, since American refusal to recognize China as a strategic equal and partner would leave the Chinese with no incentive to make major concessions involving its core national security and economic interests (like the value of the yuan).

Moreover, whereas Mr. Baker and Mr. Paulson are both “Hamiltonian” in their basic global policy orientation with its emphasis on making the world safe for Corporate America which was shared by both Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, Mr. Bush and Ms. Rice still seem to be advancing a “Wilsonian” foreign policy approach with its emphasis on a futile ideological crusade of making the world safe for democracy.

Mr. Baker and Mr. Paulson may be the right people at the right time to try resolving major US global problems. Too bad that the wrong president is at the wrong time in the White House.

Read the whole thing.


Tags: SURGE, Neocons, Iraq, War

TOP SECRET: SCI/JABOTINSKY


To: BLETCHLEY III WORKING GROUP

cc: C. DeMuth, M. Wurmser, B. Netanyahu, F. Hiatt

From: Team C

re: After Action Analysis

Date: 12/20/06



I. SUMMARY

You tasked us to analyze why the mission to save the Realm and promote the American Empire failed. We believe the essential premise of the mission remains sound. There can be no accomodation with the Arab mind and Palestinian parasites until they learn fear, humiliation and obediance through force of arms. Nothing alters the correctness of our diagnosis.

American society was not up to the historical task assigned to it because of its essential decadence and political instability due to overreliance on consent and demos. This softness allowed only a short window within which to execute our plan before American power would collapse in confusion and accomodation. This 'American Disease' (see Annex B, supra for complete details) has now infected Israel itself.

Our Sparta is now sick with the same American softness and weakness. The Olmert government's failure to ignite a regional war in the Summer of 2006 only the most glaring evidence.



To salvage this situation, we have a three fold plan. We estimate it will take at least 4 years to implement. The budget and human capital (HUMCAP) allocations are set forth in Table 27, supra.

First, to reverse the American Disease, we must accelerate its progress. We must 'heighten the contradictions' in American and Israeli society. Regional disorder in the Middle East, our initial objective in Phase One, will now serve to radicalize both societies. We must aggressively promote defeat as the consequence of betrayal and softness at home.

Our assets “SMUG CANADIAN”, “CHESHIRE CAT” and “CHEERFUL PUNDIT” will infiltrate the McCain, Guiliani and Gingrich campaign mechanisms towards that end. We also suggest an additional US $2.5 million be funnelled to Buchanan to subsize his polarization activities as well. He will be vulnerable to infusion through our usual False Flag cut out in Tempe, AZ. Later when he is exposed as relying on our money for subsistence, his following will implode. We also recommend covert support for progressive and Democratic web sites to promote the necessary dialectic of social restoration through heightened conflict. The Agents In Place to effect this manipulation are too numerous to list here.



Second, the U.S. military shows an alarming lack of commitment to our policies. The insubordination to Kagan's Surge is an unacceptable demonstration that Rumsfeld failed in his mission to subordinate the military to our Will. The Joint Staff in particular is a brake on all our plans. Accordingly, we recommend a further outreach effort to military evangelical organizations and networks to identify and promote officers who share our commitment and vision. Joint Israeli-American liaisons can further serve to cross pollinate our interrogation and other insights in controlling the Arab and Palestinians. We must also make sure that resentment in the military for failure be fanned. The military must equate Iraq-Defeat-Secular Progressive Decadence-Democrats. They then will be ripe for control.

Finally, we must begin more intensive cadre development. We failed in large part this time because we acted oversoon. Our cadres lacked sufficient numbers to occupy secondary and tertiary positions. This is true in the American government but also in Iraq at the CPA. Out talent spotting staff must be expanded beyond the Ivy League. Interbreeding and affirmative action have destroyed those student pools as reliable sources. Albert Wohlstetter before his passing in 1997 revised our PsychoActive Profile Kit (PPK). It has been improved upon since. We recommend the new PPK field trials begin immediately. Age Cohort Classes 5, 6 and 9 require three-fold expansion before OPERATION PEACOCK THRONE commences.

These initial steps, if taken together, will allow us to resume our march to victory and a New Middle East. This is a dark time for the American Empire. The Realm requires immediate assistance. If we act now, we will be poised to secure our power. The Tehran occupation will vindicate us all.

[End Executive Summary Excerpt]

Tags: Iran, Iraq, Neocons, Wurmser

A friend passed this gem along earlier today. A shame it is in print. The full vocal inflection from Meyrav would add immensely to the self-pity vibe. (Note also that this more or less confirms what the Stiftung wrote at the time).

When we read various blogs, watch cable news, etc. we get the feeling that people around the country like to talk about Neocons as an abstraction. I.e., they're fun to kick around on blogs, etc. — but it isn't taken all that seriously. Like the boogeyman they don't really exist and besides, they're cooked and done.

But this item affords a relatively unvarnished glimpse at truly who and what they are. They are unfortunately very real. And for six long years they hijacked our nation and drove it into the ditch. They want to finish out the last two as well. November 7th notwithstanding.

P.S. Take 3Take 4 of the vocals now up. It will have to suffice. We used soundboard remix for better drum sound. As said before, however, we do sound better when we can distract you with pyro, lasers and the Whole Show.



Tags: Iraq, Iraq Study Group, Richard Perle, Neocons

As long time readers know, we have maintained that the Bush phenomenon is external to traditional Dahl-esque notions of American pluralistic politics. Our premise is and was that the Administration is best understood as an amalgamation of Counter-Enlightenment impulses, a surreal blend of the Continental right authoritarian and left revolutionary internationalism.

Our diagnosis is based on first hand, extensive dealings with this regime from 2001 at the White House, OMB, DoD and elsewhere across the Executive and with leadership on Capitol Hill. These observations are not intended as a superficial blog rant, now common. If the observations are internalized and understood, then the dynamic of the last 6 years becomes agonizingly clear. And our prediction that the Administration would be *compelled* to remain true to its radical fundamentals easy to reach and alas, painfully true.



Let's clear some of the conventional wisdom rubble away at the outset. According to the media, pundit land and most 'insider bloggers' just a few weeks ago, the Iraq Study Group represented the return of 'realism' and Daddy's team putting Dubya's administration in receivership. If Bush's people bear no penalty for being disasterously wrong, the same can be said for their critics. Time and again, Dubya's critics assume “THIS TIME they must bow to our empirical consensus reality'. And are wrong yet again.

One prominent blogger receiving attention these days said to me over dinner in May 2003 that 'the Neocon moment is over'. Based on deep insider knowledge, it was intimated in authoritative tones that 'Powell would now be unleashed.' A — of course, it was wrong. And B it begs the appalling question — just WTF is a Powell 'unleashed' anyway? Dynamic jello. The person has been making similar pronouncements about every six months since, and no it is not Tom Friedman.

But we digress.

The point is that if the psycho-political dynamics of radical Movements are understood, then the disdain for the ISG, realism, diplomacy and nuance and the like are unavoidable. And the gambler's throw of the dice yet one more time also as dependable as clockwork. The mistake that many observers make is to assume that the 'Republican Party' is the 'Movement', and that the Administration is organically linked to the former. The Republican Party is and was the vehicle and even shell. But it is not the core.

It is for this reason that complaints about 'a cabal' running U.S. foreign policy are simply naive and wrong. For once the Neocons are right that this diagnosis is a middlebrow code word for anti-Semitism. The Neocons are indeed tightly networked, etc. But they are but one strand of an overarching Counter-Enlightenment ideology that suffuses the Administration from judicial nominees, enivronmental and scientific policy, law enforcement and of course national security. it is simply ludicrous as a political diagnosis to expect the Administration to accept rational empirical 'realism' in foreign policy spheres without adjusting the entire political apparatus. And to so so, as we have written is to ask them to embrace the death of their political self personas.

We are not without criticsm ourselves. Last year, we wrote for a period that the Neocons were dead in the water and a prop. We believed the other Counter-Enlightment strands within the regime, especially the Nativist ones, would assume greater influence. The abortive Israeli offensive in Lebanon however dramtically altered the political activation and energy states of the Neocons within the Administration and Movement. The threat mongering over Iran and prospect of renewed Israeli offensives continues to provide voltive recharges as well. We still do believe, however, that November 7th and the ISG did defuse — at least partially — the drumbeat for attacks on Iran. The forward pressure of an ideological Movement ensures however that a static snapshot of today will not be political environments in six months.

Because this essentially Continental political philosophical perspective and history is alien to almost all American pundits, a valuable understanding of the Administration's political dynamics has been missing from our discourse. Instead, we get treated to ”People Magazine' style pop culture frames. Helen Cooper's embarrassingly superficial piece in today's NY Times is merely one example.

Misunderstanding and inappropriate pop culture frames have implications for the Democrats. Democrats will stumble badly if they fail to grasp fully the White House's 'Movement' psychology. It would be a profound mistake to operate on the (wrong) belief that they are confronting a wounded and weakened presidency obeying traditional pluralistic behavioral norms.

Pop culture explanations ala Cooper's piece and traditional American political culture tell us, for example, that the Administration's reported preference for a sustained 2-year “surge” is because of a focus on 'legacy'. Don't believe it. Legacy to the extent it means ego certainly plays a part. But the inherent 'forward or defeat', 'victory' or 'surrender' psychology does not come from Truman, pluralism or 'legacy'. Nor will legacy adequately explain the origins and impetus for continued planning for military strikes on Iran.

If “Legacy” helps people comprehend what is otherwise bewildering to them, one supposes it is a nice palliative. But this regime appears determined to stay true to its radical nature till the very last. Brace yourselves.


Tags: Counter Enlightenment, Neocons, Iraq, Iraq Study Group, Iran

A cable news green room. A plastic fern.

Evening.

Estragon, sitting on a soiled chair, is trying to take off his boot. He pulls at it with both hands, panting. He gives up, exhausted, rests, tries again. As before.

Enter Vladimir.

ESTRAGON:
(giving up again). Nothing to be done.
VLADIMIR:
(advancing to the other soiled chair with short, stiff strides, legs wide apart). I'm beginning to come round to that opinion. All my life I've tried to put it from me, saying Vladimir, be reasonable, you haven't yet tried everything. And I resumed the struggle. (He broods, musing on the struggle. Turning to Estragon.) So there you are again.
ESTRAGON:
Am I?
VLADIMIR:
I'm glad to see you back. I thought you were gone forever.
ESTRAGON:
Me too . . .

VLADIMIR:
He said that Godot was sure to come tomorrow with Condi Rice's 'strategic context' (Pause.) What do you say to that?
ESTRAGON:
Then all we have to do is to wait on here.





Signs and portents indicate that the Bush regime will remain true to its fundamental radical nature and go va banque yet again. Mistakenly described by the venomous Krauthammer as “doubling down”, the regime is determined to obey its reckless impulses to its last fluttering breath in January 2009. Dark years lie ahead. Why?

Sign one: Cher Condi's visit to Fred Hiatt and the Neocon editorial board of the WaPo. In an interview, she confirmed Dubya's hardline commitment to the Neocon-Likud vision of the Middle East. (Kristol correctly and often says 'The last Neocon in power is actually George W. Bush'). The Administration will be radical to the last.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday rejected a bipartisan panel's recommendation that the United States seek the help of Syria and Iran in Iraq, saying the “compensation” required by any deal might be too high. She argued that neither country should need incentives to foster stability in Iraq.

“If they have an interest in a stable Iraq, they will do it anyway,” Rice said in a wide-ranging interview with Washington Post reporters and editors. She said she did not want to trade away Lebanese sovereignty to Syria or allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon as a price for peace in Iraq.

Rice also said there would be no retreat from the administration's push to promote democracy in the Middle East, a goal that was de-emphasized by the Iraq Study Group in its report last week but that Rice insisted was a “matter of strategic interest.”

Where to begin? Are we surprised at Rice's patently disingenuous strawman characterization of diplomatic engagement with strategic adversaries? How the entire mischaracterization is predicated on fears of a pregnant “might”? Or her continued peddling of the 'freedom' Kool Aid?

Some we know suggest Rice herself doesn't believe this pap for a moment. After all, she has as much signalled to them the past 2 years. They in turn have been selling, flacking, peddling and even whoring her fabulosity. A win-win. We have no doubt that in her confused neediness for approval Cher Condi did counsel the Maximum Leader that some elements of strategic engagement with the region are necessary. But she backed down and lost because: (a) she is a lightweight; (b) has no real core coherent conviction or analytical world view; and (c) is and was a staffer — and treated as such by both Dubya and Cheney. In the former's case, a beloved one perhaps. But a staffer none the less. It is no accident, as they say, that the Administration is content to leave her understaffed missing a deputy for 1/2 a year, a UN ambassador and a counselor. In many ways, she is the Tony Snow of Foggy Bottom.

Condi instead offers us . . . drum roll, please . . . “strategic context”! If you are asking yourself WTF?, you are not alone. More New Age corporate pablum. In fact, much of what passes for her analytical thinking seems to come generated from a virus-infected Microsoft Word hint file. Consder:

Indeed, Rice argued that the Middle East is being rearranged in ways that provide the United States with new opportunities, what she repeatedly called a “new strategic context.”

She said the range of struggles in the Middle East, such as the election of Hamas in the Palestinian territories, the conflict between Hezbollah and the Lebanese government, and strife in Iraq, represents a “clarifying moment” between extremists and what she called mainstream Arabs.

“This is a time for pushing and consulting and pressing and seeing what we can do to take advantage of this new strategic context,” Rice said.

So let's see. Moral clarity? Check. Binary with us/against us? Check. New 'opportunities' in instability? Check. Elements of realism? Not so much. Tellingly Rice could offer no specifics of how exactly the U.S. has been advantaged by polarization in the region. If this is realism God help us all.

Sign two: The Neocons are signalling that Bush is going to “go big” in January. We believe them. There is a swagger to them lately that is reminiscent of the pre-2005 Bush Inaugural Address. Krauthammer today thunders what is without a doubt the EOVP position. (That is, their final fallback position — the preferred EOVP choice was the Shia fantasy described in posts below). His conclusion we suspect is what is going to emerge.

He [Bush]must do two things. First, as I've been agitating, establish a new governing coalition in Baghdad that excludes Moqtada al-Sadr, a cancer that undermines the Maliki government's ability to work with us. It is encouraging that the president has already begun such a maneuver by meeting with rival Shiite and Sunni parliamentary leaders. If we help produce a cross-sectarian government that would be an ally rather than a paralyzed semi-adversary of coalition forces, we should then undertake part two: "double down'' our military effort. This means a surge in American troops with a specific mission: to secure Baghdad and (together with the support of the Baghdad government — a sine qua non) suppress Sadr's Mahdi Army.

Kagan (the Younger) at AEI recently trumpets the same. McCain in Baghdad also is in synchonization. Fittingly, the Administration dispenses with the tawdry fiction that it follows the advice of generals on the ground in Iraq. None of them seek more troops. Even Keitel Pace hasn't. The ideologocal foundation is laid bare for all to see. Iraq, Syria and Iran. They will go down to the last round in the chamber, trying to orchestrate a Wagnerian Götterdämmerung for us all.




Tags: Iraq, Neocons, Condi Rice, War, Jim Baker, Iraq Study Group

The Sunni Option: Tried in 2005-2006. Failed, but largely due to U.S. policy paralysis. The hope? It might succeed if we armed and trained the Sunni (nee dead enders, nee terrorists, nee anti-Iraqis now 'Nationalists').

The Shia Option: A simplistic but good summary of Wurmser's et al. wet dream. Note that even now re Iraq, the real enemy here is the House of Saud. We do not kid, they really do think this way.

The Inclusive Reconciliation Option: As outlined in Hadley's memo. One of the men above won't make it.

____________________

We've mentioned our view that it is too late for any of them to stave off an American strategic retreat. If you are a regular reader, then you, too likely believe our Iraqi Expedition can not be saved. Kagan and Shulsky did get their Thucydides updated after all.

But all of this was never really about Iraq, or just about Iraq. So the posturing for the next round continues re Israel, Syra and Iran. In that sense, which of the options the Decider gloms onto will say something about the world view and the ideology of the Bush regime in its twilight.

Tags: Iraq, War, Neocons, Iran, Israel

CNN reports that Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah “read the riot act” to the vice president when the two met last month in the Saudi capital, Riyadh. This on top of the more restrained NYTime piece earlier today. The Times merely says “Saudi Arabia has told the Bush administration that it might provide financial backing to Iraqi Sunnis in any war against Iraq’s Shiites if the United States pulls its troops out of Iraq, according to American and Arab diplomats.” CNN's source is obviously a Saudi diplomat, the Times' American.



Two questions emerge immediately. First, did the “riot act” get read? One wonders if a “Lost In Translation” moment occurred. If you've seen the movie, you may remember the scene: Bob Harris is filming his Suntory commercial. The director goes on at length giving instructions in Japanese. Harris' interpreter merely says “with intensity please”. Harris bewildered replies “Is that all? He seemed to be saying alot more than that.”

A key issue would be who provided the interpreter and translation. A two hour meeting really equals a normal hour conversation unless the translation is simultaneous. When American presidents used to meet the Soviets, the American side actually used the Soviet interpreters. It's not always that way. With French presidents and official visits, the State Department provides the interpreters, etc. Our guess is that we used the royal translator both for protocol and because the U.S. has laughably so few foreign service 5 rating Arabic speakers. (A 3 rating is extremely hard to obtain and is considered 'passable' for professional use in embassy postings, etc. — but that is being kind).

The second and more interesting quesiton is where Cheney's head is. By instinct and earlier professional association, he would be inclined to deference with the Saudis. Cheney is also acutely aware the American dependence on Saudi forebearance. Not just for mundane things like regional policies, covert cooperation or petroleum output, but the Sword of Damocles they hold: the petrodollar overhang. Unlike the 70s-90s, there is a viable alternative reserve currency to the dollar now, the Euro. In a few decades more, the Yuan will join. They have been diversifying already. A substantial Saudi currency re-allocation could effectively end any pretense of U.S. domestic economic stability. Cheney knows all this.

But how far apart is Cheney from his staff who still agitate for policies designed directly and indirectly to overthrow the House of Saud? How much does he still loathe 'stability' ? How much of the alleged Saudi 'threat' to support the Sunnis is a warning against policies aimed at themselves? Despite the OpEd declarations that the Saudis would intervene in Iraq, etc. they are in no shape to do so. Any intervention, even if its only financial, would merely suck the Kingdom into the war eventually and hasten its own possible dissolution — something Turki knew, and another likely reason Turki fired the consultant who wrote the OpEd.

Amazing when one thinks 500 people in Florida set this all in motion.

____
Update: Steve Clemons has details from Saudi contacts about the Turki resignation, Bandar, etc. The dynamic he lays out makes more sense to us than the original reports. Interestingly, Clemons states the Saudi internal struggle is over Cheney and military strikes on Iran, not Iraq policy per se.

Tags: Saudi Arabia, Cheney, Iraq, War

Whether the Maximum Leader announces his “New NEW Strategy for Forward Victory Paths” this week, next or at the halftime of the Super Bowl makes no difference to us. In fact, all things being equal, the latter would be a blessing. The NFL halftime show could use a good stand up act. We won't lose anything by waiting. As our friends at Global Paradigms say, it is in the end, too little too late.

But it is the holidays, and playing games of What It All Means is a tradition. In olden times before color TV, PETA and cute animal merchandizing icons, a priest would grab a small varmint and seek to divine outcomes via entrails. Villagers would nod at it all, mutter and retire to the market. Good in theory but too messy. That's out. Turning on “The Situation Room” and its kin is just too grim. So we will have to just share our own thoughts. Here goes:



First, we believe the Administration is still capable of surprise. November 7th, the ISG, 21% approval ratings, Maliki, etc. notwithstanding, the Administration's fundamental radicalism remains unchanged. (Rumsfeld was only an ancillary part of it). Recall that they started office with at least 1/2 the country believing they were illegitimate and another 25% uncertain. It didn't matter. Today, even with a Democratic Congress, it may be adjustment rather than change. A government of pragmatism and execution requires accumulation of facts, formal policy review mechanisms, etc. — all antithetical to a political Movement in power. Bush and Cheney both know that such a formalized and transparent (at least to itself) government would be the death knell of their essential political personas.

Second, we have heard rumors from a highly knowledgeable source that the NSC itself recently convened/sponsored a simple war game exercise. Participants were drafted from the usual suspect Think Tanks. The purpse of the exercise as told to the Stiftung was to play out strikes and military options on Iran. We don't know anymore than we were told, i.e. did SAIC or someone run it, was it done in house, or if actually transpired. We are running it down and actually curious to see who was Red and Blue, etc. For some reason we have to smile thinking someone at some point would have to demand a do over. The military option on Iran we believe — regardless of this report — to be very much alive internally. This will have implications for ISG recommendations.

Third, regarding the abrupt resignnation of the Saudi ambassador and his return back to Saudi Arabia: everyone is talking out of their butt right now.

The initial take was that internal Saudi royal family matters drove events more than our American tragi-comic theater. A second wave of speculation driven by Turki partisans (and let's be candid, suck ups) are claiming Bandar was too jealous of his standing here. One thing we can be sure: a veteran like Turki did not suddenly wake up and scream realizing that the House of Saud mortgaged their futures to a bunch of incompetents. He's been hip to that by 2004 at the latest. Which is to say that we do not expect it had anything to do with a “Shia Tilt” in Iraq ala “pick sides” — at least not right away.

No question as we have written before that Wurmser and others in EOVP and on the NSC want to overthrow the House of Saud badly. They continue to push the choose the Shia option internally according to the New York Times. A grand alliance with purple fingered Shia grateful to Uncle Sam was their preferred means. But we suspect in the end, having to choose between a nuclear Iran and the House of Saud, only one of them holds conferences denying the holocaust. And that one would utltimately control a Shia Iraq and Hezbollah. Easy choice.

As for the recommendations in the ISG, sadly we don't think it matters overall. Even if adopted, this crowd is not competent enough to execute them. We will get more money and talk about training, embedding and a regional conference or maybe two. It won't make any difference. We expect in Gerson's own words, Bush will reap the whirlwind, and so will we.


Tags: Iraq, Neocons, War, Jim Baker, Iraq Study Group

Beware the emerging meme to attack the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group: it is an “anti-democratic” coup.

A good example can be found here by Gerecht, who proclaims:

For the second time since 9/11, Americans have been treated to the undemocratic phenomenon of private citizens assuming the responsibilities and prerogatives of elected officials. First we had the 9/11 Commission. Not content to present its findings and recommendations to the president and Congress, the commission went on a nationwide lobbying campaign to persuade America, and pressure its representatives, into accepting its “advice.” Now we have the Baker-Hamilton Commission, officially known as the Iraq Study Group, self-consciously following in its predecessor's footsteps.

As a meme is it wrong on so many different levels. First, as you Dear Reader already know, the ISG is not “assuming the responsibilities and perogatives of elected officials.” They are making no laws (Article I), issuing no rulings to the judiciary (Article III) nor are they commanding execution or performance of any laws (Article II). So on its face, Gerecht's first sentence and linch pin of analysis is simply a manufactured non-truth.

Read more »

“It is not necessary to accept everything as true, one must only accept it as necessary.”

–The Trial

Senator Smith responds to our question in an earlier post and stole into an empty Senate last night. His mission? To unburden his troubled soul to desk chairs and scuffed carpeting. He declares, among other things, that:

I, for one, am at the end of my rope when it comes to supporting a policy that has our soldiers patrolling the same streets in the same way, being blown up by the same bombs day after day. That is absurd. It may even be criminal. I cannot support that anymore .

Not to put too fine a point on it, but when precisely did Smith feel the rope's tug? When precisely did the absurdity occur to him? In 2005? In July 2006? On November 8th, 2006? Or did he require hearing the Gray Men telling him the situation is “grave” and “deteriorating”? (Full transcipt at the jump).

More importantly, who also will come forth and embrace the obvious? The vise will be tightest on those up in 2008. Smith actually is doing fairly well in Oregon approval ratings. He could have ridden out developments a bit. Perhaps he chose early innoculation — in addition to presumably speaking somewhat from the heart and conscience one supposes.

Arrayed against Smith are some of the Dead Ender Caucus heavy hitters. They are rested and in reasonably good shape. Chambliss from Georgia for one is doing well in the polls. One can expect him to be indulgently hawkish a bit more. Same with Cochran, Stevens, Sessions and McConnell. All of them have significant approval ratings cushions to permit more trips to the Kool Aid faucet. Graham could, too. But he is somewhat unpredictable. Dole, Sununu and Domenici also could play a middle game and watch political events unfold some more. Hagel is in a different category. So is Warner, who is expected to be stepping down.

The Stiftung recommends readers watch these wounded Dead Enders: Inhoffe, Allard and Cornyn. Are all in deep holes now. Which direction they bolt reacting to Smith will be an early signal on how they see Iraq playing out within their home state base. Cornyn sometimes makes the rounds on MSNBCNNFOX so he should be a particularly good bellweather. Slightly less wounded but also in bad shape approval rating-wise are Roberts, Coleman and Alexander.

Senator Smith surprised us last nite. May there be many more such to come. We would take particular delight in watching Roberts cave and Self Criticize. Perhaps that makes us small and petty. We take life's pleasures where we can.

Read more »

Sometimes History doesn't live up to its obligations. That whole tragedy/farce bromide? Now is the time for History to step forward. We should be treated to Kristol and Perle slumping before a model of a future democratic Baghdad, presumably in the basement of AEI or Hudson. With glassy eyes they would fixate on all the details — the tiny toy Japanese SUVs on the roads, the gleaming Starbucks and many synagogues dotting almost every strip mall, and the soaring Fox News Tower looming over the entire square mile of DickCheneydammerplatz.

Had History lived up to her farcical obligations, Kristol would be absently muttering to no one in particular, “We would have built a capital for a new Mesopotamia. Now all might have beens.” Instead we get only frenzied dishonesty and blame avoidance in the media. As Jim Lobe notes, the Neocons have planned to swarm Baker as meme, labelling him the new Scowcroft, the new Emmanuel Goldstein of our age. We note again Edelman (one assumes Deaver) does not seem to be earning their public relations retainer by the Commission.



Neocon flying courts martial are searching out traitors for lynching, guilty of espousing defeatism and refusal to believe in 'victory'. As Ralph Peters says today,

Former Secretary of State James Baker and his panelists are trying to shore up the failing regional system that their generation designed. Released yesterday, their report doesn't offer “a new way forward.” Its recommendations echo past failures. And it shows no sense of how gravely the world has changed . . . After 60 years of failure, we should have figured out that the Middle East's problems can't be solved through another round of negotiations. But diplomacy is the opium of our governing elite. They'd file a “nonpaper” with Satan over the temperature in hell . . .

Today's instability was inevitable. We can no more return to the phony stability of 20 years ago than we can go back 2,000 years. Nor should we want to.

In the end, the biblical figure who best reflects Jim Baker doesn't come from the Nativity sequence, but from the end of the Gospels: Baker resembles Pontius Pilate in wanting those bedeviling local problems to go away and in imagining that, by caving in to unjust local powerbrokers, he can safeguard the empire's interests. The difference is that Pilate just wanted to wash his hands of an annoyance, while Baker would wash his hands in the blood of our troops.

One expects Weekly Standard's cup to runneth over with more of this drivel. Our Comments section notes how National Review on Line is a veritable cornucopia of near clinical despair and breakdown. All to the good. In fact, it would be disappointing if they weren't a little unhinged about now.



What is sobering? How few 'mainstream' Republicans are willing to step up and break with the Neocon kool aid even now. Guiliani and McCain are flashing the Bat Signal of Victory, summoning people to join them in fighting to the last American soldier. “Finish the Fight” indeed.

Some of our conservative friends believe that November 7th offers a chance for the Republican Party to return to 'normalcy', to slough off the AgitProp radicalism of the Administration's Christian Socialist Authoritarianism. Here's the first test to see if a non-radical Republican Party will really emerge. Will they disown the Neocon 'victory' screed that permeates the Republican Pary and so-called conservative base? Or will they go for the cheap card of emotional extremism and pandering? We aren't holding our breath.

Read more »

Today reminds one of a Nimitz class carrier trying to manuever and keep up with a renegade Cigarrette sport racer. The carrier's captain is holding proof the ship is headed for rocks. He can't listen to all the suggestions. His heart is filled with rage and shame, knowing his decisions have been ruinous. But treason within made it happen. His petty officers are snitching strawberries from the officers' mess. And that prick from COMNAVSURPAC? Who cares if he served with the captain's father? That was years ago. By just standing on the bridge, that asshole is reminding everyone the captain is a lesser man.

Besides, what can really be done? Everyone knows that if the captain were to concede and take evasive maneuvers, even the latest carriers like the U.S.S. Reagan don't turn on a dime. Inertia with 100,000 tons of steel can't be waived away. Who's really fooling whom now?



In a banana republic, there is an electric thrill that occurs when someone ad libs the truth. “Are we winning? No, Sir.” The masses titilate. “Iraq is deteriorating”. More jaw jawing. What else is there to say? Such obvious statements are treated as news events only because the society is still hungover from binge drinking the narrative Kool Aid of the last 6 years. In all truth, much of the recent U.S. reaction is not too different than the Soviet Union during early Gorbachev glasnost' — the same shock and excitement that the truth could be officially spoken.

In your heart of hearts, you know that to be true, too.

What would have been noteworthy is if someone said the obvious: even if all 79 of the vaunted ISG recommendations are accepted with unvarnished enthusiasm and DoD operational adjustments are made, Iraq is still going to fail. Done. All of this posturing is kabuki to obscure the reality that we have created and will have to deal with a failing/failed state in Mesopotamia for some time.

Even more deranged are reports that the NSC is considering political advice to Maliki on the one hand as in Hadley's weird memo. Advice that if put in the U.S. context would be to tell Bush to dump Cheney, fire Rove, get rid of the Christian Right, become a Democrat, and appoint Ted Kennedy and Barbara Boxer to his cabinet. Equally boneheaded are the “pick sides” — Sunni or Shia — crowd. It's moot — there are no cohesive Shia or Sunni sides to support and nor do they want U.S. “help”. As everyone but the Administration seems to know, the factions are intramural as well as extramural.

Even more desperate it seems are notions that the U.S. can coax Saudi Arabia to come off the sidelines as an overt participant against Iran and its proxies. This strikes the Stiftung as unrealistic as the Neocon war fever — brave Saudi OpEd declarations aside. Despite some internal security improvements, Saudi Arabia remains an immensely fragile edifice. A Saudi role directly engaging the Iranians and their proxies on the ground does not seem particularly credible or even advisable. Although, ironically, givent that Wurmser, Perle et al. have made no secret for years that their end game was the overthrow of the House of Saud, perhaps the Neocons wouldn't mind dragging the Saudis in. Granted the Saudis and Sunnis generally are threatened by waxing Persian power, but what to do remains the question.

Finally, we wonder what will be accomplished by the overarching proposed shift in geopolitical strategy. We have always thought such a strategy was and is far more important than military fantasies in halting the regional slide towards wider warfare. But this crowd could never pull it off. Dubya himself tempermentally, religiously and intellectually is not subtle enough. No one now would believe him an honest broker on the Israeli-Palestinian crisis. EOVP remains opposed as well. Cher Condi doesn't have the brains, stature, clout, vision and capability to execute it — she remains a staffer and family retainer just now removed to Foggy Bottom. In her defense, if she somehow became truly competent it still wouldn't matter. Her principal — the Maximum Leader — is driving that boat for the shoals no matter what.

Bottom line? Here's our pool slip.

The Stiftung says we get: (a) troop redeployment within Iraq and Iraqi training upgrades; (b) a regional conference(s); (c) no war with Iran through '08 (a nice double plus good bonus); and (d) more Friedman Units, hotair and posturing while U.S. troops die for Neocon deceit and Dubya's vanity.

Tags: James Baker, Iraq Study Group, Bush, Condi Rice, Iraq, Neocons, War

It's hard to be distracted for any length of time by the current soap operatic miniplots unfolding around town. There is something especially immaterial about them — disconnected from the historical tapestry clearly visible to the rest of the world.



First, the Iraq Study Group's newborn is delivered tomorrow. But the 100 page study already has been robbed of surprise by excessive leaking and WH undercutting. Whether they are the single most hyped presidential commission since Arlen's single bullet theory is an open question. We happen to agree with Matt Yglesias that the Commission is largely a middle-of-the-road establishment confab, comprised either of tacit-pro-war types or those without convictions who went along with it all anyway. A conference with Syria and Iran, assuming Cher Condi doesn't blow that, is about the best that will come of their efforts we suspect.

Gates? He is the personification of how the institutional forces of status quo will ensure that Iraq “wind down” will be protracted, measured and an ultimately futile — but “bi-partisan” — gesture. Already astute bloggers are mocking the Friedman Units being tossed around.

How bemusing to see the servile media now intoning with knowing insight that there are no “silver bullets” for Iraq. Which of course was the whole point of the initial roll of the dice in 2003 and sending the United States “ashore” and burning our boats behind. Even now the media by and large has no clue how they were used and abused.

Instead, we have been trying to find a historical precedent for what this regime has wrought. That seems a worthy inquiry that promises some needed perspective. In 2001, the U.S. had a massive budget surplus, substantial good will and political capital across the globe and a political landscape whose major polarizing domestic challenge was how to mock the term “lock box”. In 5 years our finances are in free fall, our international political capital depleted, our economy hollowed out as never before, domestic polarization at an all time high, our military reputation-as-deterrent wiped out, our actual military burnt out. A strategic audit on purely geopolitical terms regardless of party affiliation is staggering.

Contra the received wisdom in this town, Iraq really is not problem number one — it is symptom number one. One reason we have not been impressed by most of the “lists” of worst presidents currently in vogue at various holiday parties is that these lists and debates are excessively narcissistic and inwards looking. Far more interesting are the world historical implications for this regime. Can anyone find either a U.S. or non-U.S. analogue for a regime that has had such a needlessly foolish negative impact on a Great Power's standing at home and abroad? That, to us, is a holiday list worth discussing.





(Note: the shots above are from our 3D work in progress “Golem Unleashed”. You maybe can't really tell here but the Golem is brought to life by Dubya's rigid imagination).



Tags: Iraq, Baker, Neocons, Condi, Bush, Cheney

When we're wrong, we cop to it. And we were wrong about Bolton.

A few years ago, we were at a Georgetown Party. It was a mixed generational thing, with elders from both parties mingling with earnest and ambitious young people. John Bolton's nomination was just being introduced the first time.

All these 20 somethings at various non-profits (“World Peace Through MP3 Filesharing.org”, “Birkenstocks For Multliateralism.org”, etc) were hovering over the sumptuous sushi spread boldly declaring that Evil Incarnate, John Bolton would not be allowed to destroy the Holiest of Holies, the UN.

And there was a now famous blogger and left of center media persona who was at the time a relatively obscure policy wonk with an unread blog. That night this older blogger was stoking the youngsters' flames, encouraging the most strident declarations of faith in the value of standing up to the Maximum Leader.

We smirked at them all. At the blogger for the cynicism of using opposition to Bolton to brand themselves and launch a media presence. And for encouraging the youngsters to have the romantic delusion that the Senate actually would defy the White House. Besides, all of them refused to budge from the sushi.

Just goes to show the Stiftung can blow it now and then. And how cynicism can obscure the truth that there is always hope. And how even career building can also render a public service for the Nation.

That blogger, of course, is now the envy of most colleagues, having ridden Bolton and the whole nomination saga to fame and fortune. Almost no one can remember how a few short years ago they had no idea who this person was. To that person's credit, the ride was managed with supreme skill and finesse. Luck may occur, but skill turns opportunity into success. And the youngsters? They have a real notch on their belt and a new appreciation for hardball politics and yes, actual stands on principle. Hope truly is the most precious of commodities.

Bolton in the end was done in by three forces: (i) the anti-Bush multilateralists and Dems; (ii) the Powell/Armitage clique (joined by horrified careerists at State); and (iii) Rice's clique (who wanted no part of Bolton knowing full well how Bolton spied on Powell for Cheney). We knew all that sipping drinks that night fighting for sushi. What we didn't count on was Chafee and Voinovich growing a pair. And how defeating Bolton would serve as a rallying cry to a Nation in despair of Dubya's Christian Socialist Authoritarianism.

The entire affair is a wonderful example of Imperial City drama. We sat this one out as mentioned. When we have been involved in crafting things through Congress for presidential signature, we know full well the narcotic effect of deal heat on the Hill. It truly is as intense as any Wall Street deal. But sometimes that intensity is a microcosm for those involved. The Bolton saga instead resonated with Americans generally.

Stopping Bolton represented probably one of the most self-contained and focused foreign policy issues that could offer that deal frission. Our cynicism that night in Georgetown gave way to grudging respect within weeks to full on admiration. We learned a lesson. Before November 7th and the Liberation of Congress, stopping Bolton was the first step to retaking the Nation. It was Coral Sea to November's Midway.

Congratulations to all involved. The Nation and perhaps the world are better off for your hard work. But next time don't boggart all the sushi.

Tags: Neocons, John Bolton

Yeats was wrong.

No rough beast would ever bother slogging towards Bethlehem these days. Far easier to just fax in a book deal.

Which brings us to Neocons, AgitProp and our current situation. They were hip to this truism a long time ago.

A hallmark of Western civilization since, well that gets tricky as you will see below, but let's say since the Greeks, has been reliance on metanarratives to tell our story. A metanarrative is a story about a story — and are all around us: the “Fall of the Roman Empire”, the “Enlightenment”, etc. Metanarratives more than mere 'history' define who we are and how we understand the world. Thus Orwell was only partially right — he who controls history has only completed the first step. Then they must conjure up a compelling metanarrative to sell their version.

“Everyone knows” Rome “fell”. Gibbons said so. And we can see it all the time on Turner Classic Movies, etc. That's a metanarrative entrenched in the collective consciousness.

But parts of Western Civilization since the 1960s are no longer comfortable with the dead weight of existing metanarrativies. On the Left, one aspect of postmodernism is to attack, tear down and otherwise erode existing metanarratives in favor of new mixes, factually dense recitals that refute narrative coherence at all, etc. On the Right, particularly the religious authoritarian right, science, rationality, facts, are rejected in favor of emotion, faith, belief and authority. (It is for this reason — and embodying elements of both critiques — the Bush regime is the first postmodernist government in American history).



Neocons, as masters of AgitProp, know all this very well. Besides the Catholic Church, they may be the best meme promulgators and defenders around at the moment. But they also know that disintegration is only temporarily. Eventually human need for narrative compels a new one to emerge, usually combining both new and old. The best Neocon minds seek to control that dialectic, current operational issues in America and theMiddle East aside. Their technique is to manufacture a false historical trail. Contaminating understanding of the past helps ensure new narratives will embrace their world view.

A classic example in a microcosm are the collective works of Neocon Mater Dolorosa Gertrude Himmelfarb (wife of Irving, mother of William). For example, her “The Roads to Modernity: The British, French, and American Enlightenments” is a conscious effort to manufacture a new metanarrative about the origins of the Enlightment to justify current Neocon calls for Will to Power cloaked under Wilsonian pablum. Himmlefarb's assignment is to fabricate a metanarrative to claim current Neocon cant is inherent in and legitimate because of the accepted meme of the Enlightenment metanarrative. Her current 2006 work, “The Moral Imagination: From Edmund Burke to Lionel Trilling ” continues her intellectual misdirection from a different angle. Donald Kagan similarly seeks to wield a re-worked history of the Peloponnesian War to rebut Paul Kennedy and others warning of American over extension.



And now comes Max Boot, faxing it in to Bethlehem. To mention Boot in the same post as Himmelfarb and Kagan is perhaps a slight to the latter two but also emblematic at how tawdry the Neocon effort really is. To subvert the Enlightenment to Neocon ends requires a certain erudition. Similarly, for all of his intellectual slight of hand, Kagan knows a bit about the Ancient World. But what of Boot?



Over 620 pages in his “War Made New: Technology, Warfare and the Course of History 1500 to Today” is Boot's effort to explain the historical materialism that inexorably leads to Western (now American) military and thus global ascendancy. What, you might ask, are Boot's real qualifications for attempting this labor? See the comment on Yeats, supra.

Read more »