|
Crisis
of Confidence
By David Brooks
The
New York Times, May 8, 2004
It's pretty
clear we're passing through another pivot point in American
foreign policy. A year ago, we were the dominant nation in
a unipolar world. Today, we're a shellshocked hegemon.
We still
face a world of threats, but we're much less confident about
our own power. We still know we can roll over hostile armies,
but we cannot roll over problems. We get dragged down into
them. We can topple tyrants, but we don't seem to be very
good at administering nations. Our intelligence agencies have
made horrible mistakes. Our diplomacy vis-à-vis Western
Europe has been inept. We have a military filled with heroes,
but the atrocities of a few have eclipsed the nobility of
the many.
In short,
we are on the verge of a crisis of confidence.
Yesterday,
members of the administration were once again called to Capitol
Hill to testify about a gruesome mistake. Once again investigations
were begun and commissions were formed. Once again those of
us who support this war and this administration were hard
pressed to excuse what had just happened. Once again, baffling
questions arose. Whose bright idea was it to keep Saddam's
gulag open as a U.S. prison, anyway?
It's hard
not to be impressed with the way the military crisply opened
criminal investigations into the depravity at Abu Ghraib.
It's hard not to be appalled by the Pentagon's blindness to
the psychological catastrophe these photos were bound to create.
Even yesterday, months after the atrocities were first known,
Rumsfeld and company were incapable of answering the most
elemental questions from John McCain, Lindsey Graham and others
about who was in charge of the prison, and why the photos
weren't immediately seen as weapons of mass morale destruction.
If Rumsfeld had held a conference and pre-emptively presented
these photos to the world, with his response already set,
things would not look nearly as bad as they do now.
Believe
me, we've got even bigger problems than whether Rumsfeld keeps
his job. We've got the problem of defining America's role
in the world from here on out, because we are certainly not
going to put ourselves through another year like this anytime
soon. No matter how Iraq turns out, no president in the near
future is going to want to send American troops into any global
hot spot. This experience has been too searing.
Unfortunately,
states will still fail, and world-threatening chaos will still
ensue. Tyrants will still aid terrorists. Genocide will still
occur. What are we going to do then? Who is going to tackle
the future Milosevics, the future Talibans? If you were one
of those people who thought the world was dangerous with an
overreaching hyperpower, wait until you get a load of the
age of the global power vacuum.
In this
climate of self-doubt, the "realists" of right and
left are bound to re-emerge. They're going to dwell on the
limits of our power. They'll advise us to learn to tolerate
the existence of terrorist groups, since we don't really have
the means to take them on. They're going to tell us to lower
our sights, to accept autocratic stability, since democratic
revolution is too messy and utopian.
That's
a recipe for disaster. It was U.S. inaction against Al Qaeda
that got us into this mess in the first place. It was our
tolerance of Arab autocracies that contributed to the madness
in the Middle East.
To conserve
our strategy, we have to fundamentally alter our tactics.
To shore up public confidence, the U.S. has to make it clear
that it is considering fresh approaches.
We've
got to acknowledge first that the old debates are obsolete.
I wish the U.S could still go off, after Iraq, at the head
of "coalitions of the willing" to spread democracy
around the world. But the brutal fact is that the events of
the past year have discredited that approach. Nor is the U.N.
a viable alternative. A body dominated by dictatorships is
never going to promote democratic values. For decades, the
U.N. has failed as an effective world power.
We've
got to reboot. We've got to come up with a global alliance
of democracies to embody democratic ideals, harness U.S. military
power and house a permanent nation-building apparatus, filled
with people who actually possess expertise on how to do this
job.
From the
looting of the Iraqi National Museum to Abu Ghraib, this has
been a horrible year. The cause is still just, but to keep
it moving forward, we have to reinvent the enterprise.
|