Balkinization  

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Will Colin Powell Remain AWOL?

Sandy Levinson

[UPDATE: Obviously, what follows is now completely irrelevant, given Powell's extremely strong endorsement of Obama. I am obviously delighted. Had I not already "published" this posting, I would certainly simply hit the delete key for the last sentence. ]


When the history of the Bush Administration is being written, surely Colin Powell will play a key role in explaining why so many people, in the early days, believed that Bush would recapitulate his Texas experience by governing as a right-of-center moderate; moreover, if any one person explains why Congress voted Bush a blank check in Iraq, it is Colin Powell, who vouched for the wmd-rationale. (A second person is Tony Blair, and a third may well be Tom Friedman.) It turns out, of course, that Powell was basically a cipher within the Administration, and he was unceremoniously drummed out of office to make way for the more dependable Bush-can-do-no-wrong Condoleeza Rice (who, in fairness, has been a voice for moderation against the mad dogs in the Vice President's retinue).

So one might expect Powell to feel that he has some duty to the country to weigh in on the choice for the presidency. Does he really want a warmonger like John McCain, committed to some completely elusive and unarticulated notion of "victory" in Iraq and to refusing to negotiate with anyone he deems unsuitable? And does the former head of the Joint Chiefs believe that Sarah Palin is remotely equipped to be Commander-in-Chief should anything happen to the 72-year-old cancer survivor who refuses to allow genuine scrutiny of his medical records?

A friend of mine who writes for the Washington Post said that the key to understanding Powell is his reverence for George Marshall, who had an old-fashioned sense of complete loyalty to his civilian superiors. That's why, my friend said, it was unthinkable that Powell would publicly break with Bush. Recall that Marshall told Truman he would, if he voted (and I believe that Marshall didn't even vote), vote against him because of his recognition of Israel, but that didn't stop him from continuing as Secretary of State and serving Truman with the utmost loyalty.

But Powell has no such demands on him now. If he is the dedicated public servant almost all of us believe him to be, whether we agree or disagree (as on gays in the military) with him in all respects, he has a duty to tell us which of the two he believes is better fit to serve as President. Obviously, I suspect--and certainly hope--that his choice is Obama (and Biden). I would be both surprised and disappointed if he were to endorse McCain (and Palin). But the main point still stands: Why has maintained such silence in what is non-hyerbolically the most important presidential election in the lifetime of anyone younger than 76? Does he believe that retired generals must take a permanent vow of silence re politics? If so, then he should be criticizing the significant number of former military officers who have endorsed either Obama or McCain, since the issue of what role the military (and former military) should play in the polity is an extremely important one. He permanently demeaned his reputation by making a speech before the UN that contained material about which he was justifiably suspicious. He demeans himself now by refusing to speak and letting "Joe the Plumber" (not to mention the anti-urban bigotry of Sarah Palin) dominate the airwaves.


Comments:

I agree. I'm hoping that Powell and Hagel have been biding their time, waiting until after the debates, hoping to make a big splash with Obama endorsements.

I'd be interested to know the odds, taking into account McCain's age and medical history, that he would not be able to serve out a full term of office as president.
 

ummmmm...
 

I think we're at the stage where it doesn't matter who Colin Powell endorses. There was a time when he had credibility. Sadly, he lost that when he let the Bush Administration use him as a tool in their drive for war. Those he once might have influenced no longer care.
 

"Will Colin Powell Remain AWOL?"

Perfect title for a post concerning this cautious bureaucrat.

It is no surprise that Powell waited until he was almost sure Obama would win before he provided his endorsement. A political Powell Doctrine, if you like. Powell will not act unless the outcome is a sure thing and is paralyzed when an issue is in doubt.

In the Persian Gulf War, Gen, Schwarzkopf devised the aggressive end around offensive. Powell was the one who advised that George I stop the war when we had the enemy on the run resulting in 300,000 massacred Iraqis and an unresolved, ongoing Iraq threat.

In the Afghan War, Powell dragged his feet and advised that we restrain the Northern Alliance in their joint offensive with our SF to destroy the Taliban and al Qaeda so as not to offend the Talban's Pustun supporters.

Before the Iraq War, Powell rejected any option to further constrain nevertheless remove Saddam. Instead, Powell pushed for "smart sanctions" that would allow Saddam even greater latitude than he already enjoyed under the utterly corrupt Oil for Food Program by allowing Iraq to use oil revenues for anything not expressly prohibited by the UN.

One could go on and on concerning Powell's timidity, but suffice it to say that Powell recognizes a kindred spirit in Mr. Obama and Obama would have his perfect Sec State in Powell.
 

I must say calling a former four star General "timid" certainly takes some chutzpah.
However, Colin Powell is a complicated individual so many things have been written about him. Among those things, cutting and running from the 1st Gulf War was not one of them.
In their co-written 1998 book, A World Transformed, Bush and Brent Scowcroft argued that such a course would have fractured the alliance and would have had many unnecessary political and human costs associated with it. A World Transformed is a book by George H. W. Bush in which he explains why he didnt have the US conquer Iraq at the end of the earlier Gulf war: Extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq.


In 1992, the United States Secretary of Defense during the war, Dick Cheney, made the same point:
"I would guess if we had gone in there, I would still have forces in Baghdad today. We'd be running the country. We would not have been able to get everybody out and bring everybody home.

And the final point that I think needs to be made is this question of casualties. I don't think you could have done all of that without significant additional U.S. casualties, and while everybody was tremendously impressed with the low cost of the (1991) conflict, for the 146 Americans who were killed in action and for their families, it wasn't a cheap war. And the question in my mind is, how many additional American casualties is Saddam (Hussein) worth? And the answer is, not that damned many. So, I think we got it right, both when we decided to expel him from Kuwait, but also when the President made the decision that we'd achieved our objectives and we were not going to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq.

Instead of greater involvement of its own military, the United States hoped that Saddam Hussein would be overthrown in an internal coup. The Central Intelligence Agency used its assets in Iraq to organize a revolt, but the Iraqi government defeated the effort.
I could probably take some time to dispel your other conclusions, but the first one was such a doozy, I had better leave well enough alone.
 

jim montague said...

I must say calling a former four star General "timid" certainly takes some chutzpah.

Why? Militaries are by nature cautious bureaucracies. Maybe one out of four officers are warriors who seek out battle.

Petreaus is a warrior. Powell is not.

In their co-written 1998 book, A World Transformed, Bush and Brent Scowcroft argued that such a course would have fractured the alliance and would have had many unnecessary political and human costs associated with it. A World Transformed is a book by George H. W. Bush in which he explains why he didnt have the US conquer Iraq at the end of the earlier Gulf war: Extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq.

George I encouraged the Shia and Kurds to rebel with promises of US aid. He betrayed them. The most shameful episode in my life was leaving the Shia at the town we were protecting from the Republican Guard as they begged us to stay and actually ran after our vehicles trying to come with us to Saudi. I am sure many of the Shia I came to know were murdered as a result.

Moreover, the expulsion from Kuwait did not deal with the ongoing threat Saddam presented to the region.

George I's book is CYA for that betrayal and the unfinished business.

And the final point that I think needs to be made is this question of casualties. I don't think you could have done all of that without significant additional U.S. casualties...

The Iraqi military was decimated and the survivors on the run. We could have taken Iraq within two weeks in 1991 and avoided the terrorist insurgency that Saddam planned and established during the interim before the Iraq War.
 

Let's not forget Powell's role in the Bush administration's torture policy. Jane Mayer wrote in The Dark Side:

"Bush also knew about, and approved of, White House meetings in which his top cabinet members were briefed by the CIA on its plan to use specific 'enhanced' interrogation techniques on various high-value detainees. The meetings were chaired by Rice. . . . The participants were members of the Principals Committee, the five Bush cabinet members who handled national security matters: Vice President Cheney, Secretary of State Powell, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, CIA Director Tenet, and Attorney General Ashcroft."
 

Weird. Seems that "Bart"'s hatred of Powell is of quite recent origin.

See here ("Bart" refers to Powell's "resume[] of accomplishment").

Wonder what changed his mind?

Cheers,
 

Powell will not act unless the outcome is a sure thing

At least you've finally admitted that an Obama win is a sure thing.
 

Post a Comment

Older Posts
Newer Posts
Home