From the WSJ Opinion Archives
The
Old Cabal and Chain
On the paranoid fringes of both the isolationist right and the anti-American
left, a new conspiracy theory has taken hold to explain the dreaded (by these
folks) impending liberation of Iraq. As Pat Buchanan puts it in his inaptly
named magazine, The American Conservative, "a cabal of polemicists and
public officials" are "colluding with Israel" to "ensnare our
country in a series of wars that are not in America's interests."
Echoing Buchanan is Edward Said, a literature professor at Columbia who by varying accounts is either Egyptian or Palestinian. "An immensely wealthy and powerful republic has been hijacked by a small cabal of individuals," Said writes on the crackpot-left site Counterpunch.org. "Wherever you look in the Congress there are the tell-tale signs either of the Zionist lobby, the right-wing Christians, or the military-industrial complex, three inordinately influential minority groups who share hostility to the Arab world, unbridled support for extremist Zionism, and an insensate conviction that they are on the side of the angels."
These complaints are indistinguishable in substance from the comments we noted Tuesday from Rep. Jim Moran (D., Va.) and David Duke. Buchanan and Said are a bit slicker than Moran and Duke, both managing to avoid explicitly attacking "the Jews." Buchanan answers the charge of anti-Semitism:
They charge us with anti-Semitism--i.e., a hatred of Jews for their faith, heritage, or ancestry. False. The truth is, those hurling these charges harbor a "passionate attachment" to a nation not our own that causes them to subordinate the interests of their own country and to act on an assumption that, somehow, what's good for Israel is good for America.
This comes one paragraph after Buchanan complains that "not in our lifetimes has America been so isolated from old friends." Buchanan's concern for all America's other allies stands in stark contrast with his scornful dismissal of the idea that there may "somehow" be a confluence of interests between America and Israel. Is this anti-Semitic? We report, you decide.
Buchanan and Said are all hate and no cattle. Both blast the idea of liberating Iraq, but how do they propose to deal with the threat of a rogue regime armed with weapons of international destruction in defiance of 17 resolutions passed under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter? Do they favor the continuation of sanctions, which, as Walter Russell Mead notes in the Washington Post, kill "about as many people every year as the Gulf War"? Neither offers any clue.
Said changes the subject to Israel's "violation" of 64 U.N. resolutions, failing to point out that, as The Economist noted in October, those resolutions were passed under Chapter VI and are nonbinding. Said also pats himself on the back for having opposed Saddam Hussein's Baathist tyranny in the 1970s and '80s--but today it appears his hatred of America outweighs any qualms about Saddam.
There's a logical contradiction at the heart of the "Zionist cabal" complaint. Buchanan complains that the liberation of Iraq would be the first of "a series of wars in the Middle East that could ignite the Clash of Civilizations against which Harvard professor Samuel Huntington has warned, a war we believe would be a tragedy and a disaster for this Republic." (Let's see: Iran invaded the U.S. Embassy in 1979, Hezbollah blew up the Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983, Libya attacked Americans several times in the mid-'80s, and al Qaeda attacked American interests in New York, Africa and Yemen throughout the 1990s before murdering 3,000 people on American soil in 2001--and Buchanan is worried that we may be "igniting" a "clash" with Islam by freeing a nation that is 97% Muslim from a brutal dictator?)
If Buchanan and Said are right in their predictions of disaster--if the result of Saddam's overthrow turns out to be, as Said puts it, "increasing the world's already ample stores of anti-Americanism" and provoking rather than preventing terrorism, how is this in Israel's interest? The Associated Press reports from Beirut that Hezbollah honcho Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah predicts, in the AP's paraphrase, that "a U.S.-led invasion of Iraq will awaken Arabs and Muslims, ultimately leading to Israel's destruction and an end to American dominance in the region." This is hyperbole, and we've long argued that the opposite will turn out to be true: that American success in Iraq will quiet, rather than inflame, the Arab street. But if we're wrong about this and Buchanan and Said are right, how exactly will Israel be better off?
National Review's Jonah Goldberg has a tart rejoinder to the likes of Buchanan and Said: "They've lost an argument. They lost it on the merits and they don't like it. In their arrogance or bitterness, they assume they couldn't have lost the fight fairly, and so they look for whispering neocons and clever Jews (or, in other contexts, nefarious oil traders). This is an ugly, ugly way to argue because it forces the opposition to prove a negative and it questions the patriotism of people who've never said an unpatriotic thing. In short, they are sore losers."
The
Case for Optimism on Iraqi Democracy
Writing in The New Republic, University of Chicago political scientist Daniel
Drezner argues that the prospects for a democratic Iraq are stronger than many
people think. He cites two key factors in promoting democracy during the 20th
century: American military occupation and proximity to other democracies. "Allied
occupation contributed to a successful democratic transition not only in Japan,
but in France, Italy, Austria, and West Germany; it pushed Greece, the Philippines,
and South Korea toward democratization as well." More recently, U.S. military
interventions pushed Haiti, Panama and the Balkans in a democratic direction.
And Iraq's neighborhood is not as undemocratic as it may seem:
To Iraq's north lies Turkey, a stable, liberal, and secular Muslim democracy whose government is furiously trying to adopt Western human rights norms as part of its bid for European Union membership. Iraq's eastern border is with Iran, a country that may not be liberal, but has been a practicing electoral democracy for two decades. More importantly, the majority of Iran's population wants further democratization and liberalization and has emphasized this point through routine mass protests. To Iraq's west lies Jordan, which the 2000 edition of the authoritative Freedom House country rankings named the most liberal Arab state (admittedly a dubious honor).
And, of course, there's the example of Northern Iraq, a predominantly Kurdish region in which two different parties--the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK)--administer separate parcels of territory. By the standards of the Middle East, these areas are freely and fairly governed. As Human Rights Watch reported in September 2002, "Both the KDP and PUK administrations promulgated laws and adopted decisions aimed at the protection of fundamental civil and political rights, including freedom of expression and of association."
"Democratizing Iraq won't be easy," Drezner concedes. "But the conditions aren't nearly as barren as these experts suggest, and the potential upside is enormous." Imagine Baathist Syria, "suddenly surrounded by established democracies (Israel and Turkey) and emerging democracies (Iraq and Jordan)."
Blair
Stands Firm
A steadfast Prime Minister Tony Blair yesterday "served notice that he
would defy scores of Labour MPs and millions of voters as he dismissed the idea
that America could go it alone," the Times of London reports. "He
said for the first time that Britain and America already had legal authority
for attacking Iraq. And he implied that if the UN could not bring itself to
enforce its will, others would have to do so." In the face of continuing
French intransigence, Reuters
reports Colin Powell is now saying there may be no 18th U.N. resolution.
First
Guinea Goes Wobbly, Now This
"Sweden may halt arms exports to the United States if U.S.-led forces attack
Iraq without a mandate from the United Nations Security Council," Reuters
reports.
United Nations
"France Rejects British-Proposed Iraq Plan"--headline, Associated Press, March 13
"Iraq Rejects British Compromise Proposal"--headline, Associated Press, March 13
The
French Connection
French, Chinese and Syrian companies "have been illicitly supplying Saddam
Hussein with materials used in building long-range surface-to-surface missiles,"
the New York Times' William Safire reports. Safire says Iraq used French and
Syrian middlemen to purchase 20 tons of "a transparent liquid rubber named
hydroxy terminated polybutadiene, familiarly known in the advanced-rocket trade
as HTPB" from a Chinese company. A French company, CIS Paris, brokered
the deal, in which the HTPB was shipped by sea from China to Syria, then trucked
into Iraq, all in violation of U.N. sanctions.
"Perhaps a few intrepid members of the Chirac Adoration Society, formerly known as the French media, will ask France's lax export-control authorities about these shipments," Safire writes.
A
Step Toward U.N. Withdrawal?
It somehow seems a fitting metaphor: "The spraying fountain in San Francisco's
United Nations Plaza is used as a toilet, bathtub and crack den more often than
a soothing place to relax and read a book," the San Francisco Chronicle
reports. "That, city officials say, is why they fenced it off Tuesday and
are considering removing it after battling for years to keep it clean and safe."
By Any Other Name
Yesterday we
noted that the mayor of Moab, Utah, is unhappy his town shares a name with
the MOAB, or Massive Ordnance Air Burst, America's biggest conventional weapon.
We suggested renaming it the Manhattan Project in honor of the city that has
seen the most carnage in the war against Islamic terrorism. Readers Louis Tartaglia
and Tipton Cole suggested calling it Big Apple instead; Tartaglia notes that
it's an acronym for Bomb Is Gigantic and Packs Powerful Lethal Explosion.
Reader David Kahn suggests another two-word moniker: Serious Consequences. That would help resolve the debate over whether Resolution 1441 is sufficient to authorize an attack on Iraq.
Understanding the New World Disorder
Here are a pair of fascinating (but long) articles exploring issues pertinent
to the current conflict: On TechCentralStation.com, Lee
Harris (whose brilliant Policy Review essays on al
Qaeda's fantasy ideology and the intellectual
roots of anti-Americanism have appeared on this Web site) argues that the
coming intervention in Iraq "will constitute one of those momentous turning
points of history in which one nation under the guidance of a strong-willed,
self-confident leader undertakes to alter the fundamental state of the world.
It is, to use the language of Hegel, an event that is world-historical
in its significance and scope. And it will be world-historical, no matter
what the outcome may be."
And in Esquire, Thomas P.M. Barnett of the Naval War College divides the world into two parts: "Show me where globalization is thick with network connectivity, financial transactions, liberal media flows, and collective security, and I will show you regions featuring stable governments, rising standards of living, and more deaths by suicide than murder. These parts of the world I call the Functioning Core, or Core. But show me where globalization is thinning or just plain absent, and I will show you regions plagued by politically repressive regimes, widespread poverty and disease, routine mass murder, and--most important--the chronic conflicts that incubate the next generation of global terrorists. These parts of the world I call the Non-Integrating Gap, or Gap." It is from this Gap that terrorism arises, and bringing these countries into the Core is crucial for America's national security. "If gated communities and rent-a-cops were enough, September 11 never would have happened."
Neither of these summaries can do the articles justice; read them in full.
Also well worth reading: Oriana Fallaci in today's Wall Street Journal.
Taliban
Watch
"It is their view that what transpires in the clubs is immoral and therefore
should be banned, much like the Taliban demands strict adherence to their codes."
So says witless Whit Cook II, lawyer for two Louisiana nudie bars, complaining
about a new parish law regulating "sexually oriented businesses."
You
Don't Say--I
"Pornography Prevalent on File-Sharing Services"--headline, Washington
Post, March 13
Zero-Tolerance
Watch
"A 13-year-old middle school student has been suspended for 10 days because
his gadget-laden calculator includes a knife, violating the school district's
zero-tolerance policy on weapons," the Associated Press reports from Brandon,
Fla. The "knife" is actually a two-inch blade, and the Burns
Middle School pupil, Cortez Curtis, "was not brandishing the weapon
or threatening a classmate." But "district officials say their policy
is clear: Weapons are weapons. Whether butter knife or machete, 2 inches or
2 feet, policy dictates an automatic 10-day suspension."
New Scientist reports that "the world's first brain prosthesis . . . is about to be tested in California." Maybe they should test it in Brandon, Fla., instead.
'Relevant
yet Expendable'
Chimes, the student newspaper of Calvin College (not to be confused with Calvin
Coolidge), last week published the following correction:
A typo in a headline on page 17 of the February 28 issue mistakenly conveyed the wrong meaning for the article. Instead of "Relevant yet expendable: the ideals of Black History Month," the headline should have read, "Relevant yet expandable . . ." Neither the Chimes editorial staff nor the author of the article believe that the ideals of Black History Month are expendable, as is demonstrated in the article itself. Chimes sincerely regrets the error.
Next
on the Chopping Block: Kitties and Puppies
"Budget Cuts Hurt Babies"--headline, WIXT-TV Web Site (Syracuse, N.Y.),
March 12
You
Don't Say--II
"State Supreme Court Justice Bobbe Bridge said yesterday she wishes she
could 'rewind the clock' to before she drank, drove and hit another vehicle
last month."--Seattle Times, March 12
Piscine
Pedalers
Flighty feminist Gloria Steinem is generally credited with having said "A
woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle," but this
page quotes Steinem as disclaiming the "witticism" and attributing
it to "a distinguished Australian educator, journalist and politician"
named Irina Dunn. Well, no wonder Gloria doesn't want credit, for it appears
as though fish do need bicycles. CNN reports that in 2001 "four
human deaths were linked to shark bikes compared with 13 in 2000."
Manager's
Journal
The
San Francisco Chronicle reports on a fracas that broke out earlier this week
between two men from Fremont, Calif. David Wilson, 36, had hired 37-year-old
Tim Phillips to do some odd jobs. On Monday morning, after the pair had worked
through the night installing some marble in Wilson's kitchen, Wilson discovered
his puppy was missing. "Wilson looked for the dog around his house while
Phillips walked around the neighborhood. At one point, Wilson walked into his
backyard and found one of his pet chickens dead and dismembered."
According to police, Wilson, blaming Phillips for the chicken's unfortunate fate, "pulled a knife and got into a tussle with Phillips, who was cut above an eye, police said." Then he "allegedly picked up a board and smashed out all the windows on Phillips' 1993 Ford van and slashed all of the tires." Phillips ran away and called police.
"Officer Stephen Delema arrived and surveyed the scene. 'I walked into the backyard and found a dead chicken on the deck,' Delema wrote in his report. 'The chicken appeared to have been torn apart.' " Delema said he thought a dog might have killed the chicken. "Wilson, who owns several chickens and roosters as pets, told police that after he saw his beloved chicken torn to shreds, he 'looked closer and saw what he believed were piles of dead chicken meat with feathers sticking out of the meat,' Delema reported. But Delema said he saw no such thing, just one dead chicken."
The Chronicle quotes Detective Bill Veteran of Fremont's finest: "This was definitely a dysfunctional encounter." You don't say, Sherlock.
Phillips and Wilson hadn't been acquainted long. They met several weeks ago--at an "anger-management class."
(Elizabeth Crowley helps compile Best of the Web Today. Thanks to Shelley Taylor, Joel Goldberg, Barak Moore, Aaron Gross, David Gerstman, Evan Winer, Yehuda Hilewitz, Nancy Zimmerman, Carl Sherer, Drew Cooper, Steven Platzer, Mara Gold, Linda Cooke, Douglas Schwartz, Jenifer Sawicki, Michael Segal, Rosanne Klass, Marie Bourgeois, Raghu Desikan, Jerome Marcus, Scot Silverstein, Lawrence Weiss, S.E. Brenner, Ernie Taormina, Jennifer Ray, Michael Siegel, Judie Amsel, C.E. Dobkin, Jose Guardia, Jonathan Rothenberg, Monty Krieger, Glenn Bialik, Bruce Alpert, William Ethridge, Wijnand van de Beek, Mark Kolmar, Terry Hinshaw, Billy Judge, Michael Kingsley, David Stern, Joe Littrell, Pamela Smith, Andy McDougal, Steve Baus, Ned May, Hollis Stahl, Robert Cunningham and Ken Jorgensen. If you have a tip, write us at opinionjournal@wsj.com, and please include the URL.)
Today on OpinionJournal:
- Oriana Fallaci on war in Iraq: the rage, the pride and the doubt.
- John Fund: Hollywood celebs aren't antiwar. They just hate the president.
- Daniel Ford: A combat pilot's Vietnam story.
