During yesterday's Senate testimony, General David Petraeus took tough questions from five potential new bosses. Senators Biden (D), Clinton (D), Dodd (D) , Obama (D) and McCain (R) all put the commander of troops in Iraq through questioning. They are all hoping to be the next Commander in ChiefBut maybe the hardest question came when the senior Republican Senator on the Armed Servies committee, John Warner (who is not running for President) asked the question we asked in our classroom on 9/11.
Warner asked Gen. whether the current strategy in Iraq "will make America safer."
Petraeus replied, "I believe that this is indeed the best course of action to achieve our objectives in Iraq."
Warner repeated his unanswered question: "Does that make America safer?"
Petraeus said, "I don't know, actually. … I have not stepped back. … I have tried to focus on what I think a commander is supposed to do, which is to determine the best recommendations to achieve the objectives of the policy for which his mission is desired."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/12/washington/12scene.html
The General's answer may be politcally embarassing. But maybe that's because his job can only be part of the answer in the complex equation in the first trend in comparing political systems: Democratization. Remembering our foundations, Gen. George Washington had much help from political thinkers.
According to political scientist Samuel Huntington, the modern world is now in a "third wave of democratization" that began during the 1970s. the first wave developed gradually over time; the second wave occured after the allied victory in World War II, and continued until the early 1960s. The second wave was characterized by de-colonization around the globe. The third wave is characterized by the defeat of dictorial or totalitarian rulers from South america to Eastern Europe to some parts of Africa. Recent political turnover in Mexico may be interpreted as part of this "third wave" of democratization.
Huntington outlines some factors on why democratization has occured:
- The loss of legitimacy of both right and left wing authoritarian regimes
- The expansion of an urban middle class in developing countries
- A new emphaasis on "human rights" by the United States and the EU
- The snowball effect: When one country becomes democratic, it influences others to do so. An example is Poland's influence on other nationas of Eastern Europe during the 1980s. It is also George W. Bush's hope for his legacy.
2 comments:
Now that Gen. Petraeus has given his testimony, many people are accusing him of being Bush's puppet because he gave such an upbeat report on Iraq. But if he had said, "We're losing, let's get out," would he not be accused of being a mouthpiece for the antiwar crowd? His answer was politically embarassing to the Democrats.
Getting on to the issue of the snowball effect, first I must state the obvious: An alliance with a stable Iraq is a major political, military, and economic checkmate against Iran, especially considering Ahmadinejad's conduct since 2005. The presence of a stable democracy next door may intensify pressure on Ahmadinejad to leave office. Ahmadinejad is unpopular already with young Iranians, especially since he reversed Khatami's reforms. Only time will tell how this will pan out.
The problem with that is that Iraq is anything but stable. 30,000 troops in Bush's "surge" can only go so far in this War because of the complexity of the opponent. Petraeus' uncertainty about the War making America safer shows that the uncertainty that Americans have been feeling for the past couple of years about the War is leaking into the military and war weariness is becoming a growing problem. War trauma from troops returning from the Iraq War is higher than it was from the Vietnam War and the troops are going unhelped by the government. Petraeus alone can't save Iraq. We need a competent leader in the White House that can bring a stable legitimate government into the nation that we destroyed.
-dell
Post a Comment