Winning Modern Wars. Iraq, Terrorism, and the American Empire [Englisch] [Gebundene Ausgabe]

Second, prepare to be amazed because General Wesley Clark seems almost a seer in his predictions of the Iraq offensive (initiated by the Bush Administration). He explains in detail the dynamics of the Middle East, and exactly what type of participation needs to be involved to achieve peace. His theories are nothing short of brilliant, and sensitive, as were his CNN commentaries and analysis. You would be hard pressed to find so thorough a volume, so accurate a volume, by any other military leader.

General Wesley K. Clark, with this book, gives credibility to his vast knowledge of foreign policy, and demonstrates his superior critical thinking skills. He is a shining star on the political horizon, and, quite possibly, will be the brightest military strategist and diplomat to hold the office of President of the United States.

While it is hard to argue with his observations regarding the way the Bush administration cynically manipulated and played on the fears and trepidations of the populace in pursuing rather conventional engagements since it would be easy and likley successful, first with the Afghans and later the Iraqis, it is also true that it is extremely self-serving to do so for a man who is now an announced candidate for President. And while I agree that he is very much on the mark in terms of the accuracy and cogency of his arguments against both the tenor and intensity of the war effort since 911, one tires of the repeated criticism and attacks on Bush, even though Clark sometimes does so quite convincingly. For example he cites how Donald Rumsfeld and others within his entourage craved a chance to attack Iraq even before assuming office, and also how both they and Condoleeza Rice consciously viewed the event of 911 as offering them an opportunity to use the situation to go after Saddam. For Clark, Saddam was a virtual "hobbyhorse" they wanted to ride, even at the expense of ignoring more pressing concerns such as the active pursuit of Al Qaeda and exaggerating the threat and the evidence concerning Saddam's possible role as a threat to America. So, Clark maintains, we attacked the wrong target at the worst possible moment, squandering our resources in an unnecessary and pointless showdown with Sadam Hussein.

Finally, as he turns his focus to concentrate on more global concerns, including how he would approach the foreign policy issues he feels have so far vexed the current administration, he becomes more general, more philosophical, and less specific. Just like a serious Presidential candidate might! While this is to be expected, I was disappointed by his reflections, which seemed to me to be more likely written by consulting committees worried about offending popular sensibilities than anything else. Yet all that said, it is obvious that he is bright, energetic, and extremely ambitious. What worries me most about this remarkable man is the fact that he rose within the military to become a general, which mean he is a master politician, for no one becomes a general in today's army without being what they call a "team player" one who goes along to get along". The military values conformity and obedience more than anything, and we have to ask ourselves, do we really need another Colin Powell type, another guy so willing to work for consensus above all else that he sacrifices his beliefs and principles to carry the day? Based on what I read in this book, Clark is obviously bright enough to carry it off. Whether he makes a good choice to be our next President is something the reader will have to decide for himself. Enjoy!

Clark was against the war in Iraq. This military venture has failed all intended political purposes. We have not found a Iraqi nuclear program. There are no links between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. The invasion of Iraq has not squelched terrorism, but instead exacerbated as thousands of terrorists throughout the Islamic World infiltrate Iraq and shoot U.S. soldiers as easy target. Installing a lasting democracy seems unlikely.

The U.S. Administration post war planning was terrible. The Administration made utopic assumptions that the Iraqis would be ecstatic about being liberated by U.S. forces. The Administration underestimated the Baath party underground resistance, the degree of Shiite factionalism. It also disbanded the Iraqi Army adding 400,000 armed men to the rank of the unemployed. Many boosted the underground Baath party resistance. In attempting to retain full control of the Iraq post war situation, the Administration raised its costs and risks. This is instead of leveraging the UN and NATO peacekeeping forces.

Per Clark, terrorism is supranational with no State allegiance. The Administration is attempting to fight it with an obsolete Cold War framework of State-vs-State conflicts. It is attempting to fight terrorism as it fought back Nazism in WWII, and Communism thereafter. The Administration has listed six other targeted countries for upcoming preemptive wars. These include: Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia, and Sudan. This is a mistake that the U.S. can't afford. Taking over these countries will do nothing to fight terrorism.

The U.S. is concerned about the wrong countries. The root causes of Islamic terrorism are:
a) Saudi Arabia extreme Wahhabist ideology which dominates its schools;
b) the impoverished, corrupt society of Pakistan and its madrassas schools which teach an equally extreme version of Islam; and
c) the supercharged linkage with the Palestinians.
But, the U.S. considers Saudi Arabia and Pakistan their allies. And, its Israeli bias further inflames the anti-Americanism throughout Islam.

For Clark the solution to fight terrorism is to boost intelligence agencies effectiveness worldwide. U.S. funding should be redirected towards the CIA, FBI, and NSA. Cooperation with European and other intelligence agencies should be implemented. An international legal framework should be developed to reach uniform enforcement actions when dealing with terrorists worldwide.

Regarding Islam, Clark accepts that achieving transformation of the region is a generation away. The concept that we can install democratic regimes that would take hold within these countries in a few years is utopic. These countries do not have an empowered informed middle class capable of supporting lasting democracies.

Clark recommends that bringing the Islamic Middle East to converge towards the remainder of the World entails:
a) focusing on more pragmatic education (eliminate Wahhabism from school curriculum);
b) promote broader economic development; and
c) encourage wider political participation.
These measures are incremental and will take decades. They can't be enforced militarily.

Regarding foreign policy, we have to end our unilateralism immediately. This foreign policy has inflamed both Islam and the West. It has threatened the viability of the UN and NATO. Unilateralism should be replaced by multilateralism. UN and NATO should be fully supported and lead by the U.S. The UN Security Council unanimous rule should be changed. It gives too much power to a single dissenting Security Council country member. And, it does promote doing nothing in even the most egregious circumstances. Clark understands that, and states it is up to the U.S. to lead in the amending of such policies so as to promote the effectiveness of multilateralistic supranational institutions.

Clark has a far reaching 100 year vision. He wants the U.S. to maintain the best environment over the next 100 years. To him the environment has several meanings. It obviously means the physical environment. The U.S. has to do more to protect the Air, Water, and natural resources. He is also concerned about constitutional environment. The U.S. should maintain an integer legal and judicial system. It should also maintain a civic culture of transparency and accountability to set a world standard for governance. He is also concerned about the business environment. The U.S. should implement policies so as to encourage individuals and businesses to reap the fruit of their labor, innovation, and energy to the optimal level. Obviously, these different environments have some diverging interests. And, the key is to maintain an optimal balance between them, so that the U.S. society as a whole remains a leader and enviable model for the World in 2103 (hundred years from now).

Clark is concerned about fiscal responsibility. The U.S. 10 year Budget has shifted from a $5 trillion Budget Surplus in 2001 to a $5 trillion budget Deficit in 2003. This negative swing of $10 trillion was in part due to a global economic contraction after 2001. But, it was in good part due to the Bush Administration policies that combined a reckless boost in Defense spending for fighting aboard combined with equally irresponsible series of fiscally damaging tax cuts.

Clark economic plan follows pretty much the beneficial aspects of Clintonomics. This includes efforts to balance the Budget and reduce government debt. This would reduce government dissavings and promote private sector savings and investments. In turn, the private sector savings and investments will create new jobs and also reduce the U.S. skyrocketing current account deficit. This is because as domestic savings come closer to matching domestic investments, the need for direct foreign investments decline.