Who will rise to the occasion?
This is a time of urgent need for great leadership. But here’s where we are…
Do you ever get the feeling that at this point Washington is run by two rival gangs that have a great deal in common with each other, including an essential lack of interest in the well-being of the turf on which they fight?
Yes, and it’s a sinking feeling. The Iraq report is about to come out on how the surge is going, and we just want to know the truth. We’ll deal with it accordingly. But government and media are politicizing it according to partisan advantage and agenda.
As a counterpoint to most of what’s reported in the big media, here are a few articles to consider, to round out the story more completely. WaPo calls this one “A Season of Hope,” which is what caught my attention.
A few months ago, it was the received wisdom that Iraq was in the midst of a rapidly escalating civil war. That claim is no longer plausible.
While the level of violence is still unacceptably high, the surge has disrupted the cycle of escalation and proved that progress is possible. Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno’s briefing this month was an antidote to pessimism. “Total attacks,” he said, “are at their lowest levels since August of 2006.” Some of the most violent and lawless regions of Iraq, such as Anbar and Diyala, have been stabilized with the cooperation of local Sunni leaders who have turned against al-Qaeda thuggery. Insurgents are being pushed out of population centers and then targeted in further operations. Sectarian murders in Baghdad have gone down by more than 50 percent in a few months, reaching their lowest levels since the Samarra mosque bombing. And new sectarian provocations — such as the al-Qaeda bombings in Nineveh — have not resulted in the usual spiral of revenge murders.
With the surge fully in place only as of last month, the suddenness of these results is startling. Skeptical military experts have returned from Iraq with praise for the Petraeus strategy. And supporters of the war have been left to wonder: What if these approaches had been employed a year earlier?
That’s a good question, and this is good analysis. Americans want to hear good analysis, but we’re not getting much from the mainstream. Some of the foreign media are giving General Petraeus a fair hearing.
General Petraeus said the surge strategy, involving the deployment of an extra 20,000 troops in Iraq, would continue for a few months before the troop level in the country was phased down. But the objective was to hold all the gains that had been made so far.
He acknowledged there was still too much violence and that al-Qa’ida and militias with the “malign involvement” of Iran were still serious threats. But the surge strategy had turned the US forces into pursuers instead of defenders.
There’s a key point we haven’t heard.
The Wall Street Journal had the best report and analysis I’ve seen so far on President Bush’s surprise visit to Iraq over the weekend. Just about everyone else is politicizing that, too.
Which gets back to Peggy Noonan’s column in the WSJ, up at top. It’s incisive and clear. We know what’s wrong, and it’s not all in Iraq.
Not only hearts and minds are invested in a particular stand. Careers are, too. Candidates are invested in a position they took; people are dug in, caught. Every member of Congress is constrained by campaign promises: “We’ll fight” or “We’ll leave.” The same for every opinion spouter–every pundit, columnist, talk show host, editorialist–all of whom have a base, all of whom pay a price for deviating from the party line, whatever the party, and whatever the line. All this freezes things. It makes immobile what should be fluid. It keeps people from thinking.
What is needed is simple maturity, a vow to look to–to care about–America’s interests in the long term, a commitment to look at the facts as they are and try to come to conclusions. This may require in some cases a certain throwing off of preconceptions, previous statements and former stands. It would certainly require the mature ability to come to agreement with those you otherwise hate, and the guts to summon the help of, and admit you need the help of, the other side.
I think Americans are longing for…desperate for….this kind of mature leadership in our government. It has to start somewhere, with someone. And in the week the presidential campaigns are starting to crank up the heat, the week before Gen. Petraeus releases the anticipated/dreaded Iraq report, it would take magnanimous character to rise to that leadership. And encourage others of both parties to elevate the tone, and the intentions.
Would it help if the president were graceful, humble, and asked for help? Why, yes. Would it help if he credited those who opposed him with not only good motives but actual wisdom? Yes. And if he tried it, it would make news. It would really, as his press aides say, break through the clutter.
I don’t see how the president’s supporters can summon grace from others when they so rarely show it themselves. And I don’t see how anyone can think grace and generosity of spirit wouldn’t help. They would. They always do in big debates. And they would provide the kind of backdrop Gen. Petraeus deserves, the kind in which his words can be heard.
