Moving Forward in the Long War

There has always been something profoundly brave and good about the ideology of neoconservatism. America is so wealthy, so powerful, and historically so dedicated to the purpose of justice and democracy. Why shouldn’t we use our military to free those subjugated by tyrants and murdered en masse by oppressors? How dare we not intervene in genocides? Libertarians believe that the government should not intervene in our individual rights. This is how, domestically, we protect our freedom from our own government. But how do we protect the life and freedom of those less fortunate than us elsewhere?

In fact, where is our military now? Where is it in the Sudan, in Darfur? Where were we in Rwanda during that tragedy? This is the meat of the issue, I think. Neoconservative policy must reflect a genuine desire to spread freedom and protect human life in all parts of the world, not just those that are rich in resources. Iraq was a mistake because we hadn’t won the war of global opinion, yet. We were seen by allies and foes alike as aggressors, perhaps after oil profits, perhaps vengeful of past wrongs. Either way, we were seen as bullies and had very little help in the struggle to free the Iraqi people. The mistake in Iraq was not that we overthrew the brutal dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. Rather, it is that we invaded with too little planning, too few allies, and not nearly enough of a defensive strategy against the hostile powers in Iran and Syria.

We stand idly by now, as tens of thousands in Darfur are slaughtered because we have become so stymied in our progress in Iraq and, sadly, Afghanistan. I must lament the failure in the former safe-haven of both Al Queda and the Taliban. Here is one area we need to redouble our military efforts.

Meanwhile, Russia and China, the two giant rogue states, work behind the scenes, encouraging Iran and Venezuela in their defiance of America and spreading terrorism, global unrest, and civil war throughout the 3rd world. China holds much of Africa in its deep pocket, and foments much of the violence there–or at least does little to intervene.

Here are two countries that, if they had the means, would quite quickly bring Iran or Venezuela to their knees in order to rob them of their resources, and yet in the streets of Tehran who do the young men shout against? Whose flag is burned? America’s. More on this later…

Certainly it is not the end goal to simply persuade the world that the United States is a purveyor of good, of freedom, of prosperity. However, this PR campaign certainly wouldn’t hurt the cause. Rather, it would do much to quell these protests. It would further cast Russia and China into the light they deserve. We should lead by example first, and then worry about long-term strategy. First we should enter areas of conflict that are not so controversial. We should establish our role as freedom fighters and defenders of liberty. If we had a decent track record on this point, we would have met with much less resistance in Iraq from our allies. Perhaps NATO or the United Nations would be operating heavily in that country, rather than US troops and a farcical coalition of the willing–though I am loath to recommend any reliance upon the UN to accomplish much of anything militarily. They are very nearly as ineffectual as the African Union. NATO is a far more reliable organization.

In summation, the following global military strategy is essential if we are to eventually come up against the threat of China and Russia as well as in our Long War against Terrorism. We must fight battles of mercy as well as strategy. We must save the weak–the hundreds of thousands of dispossessed in the Sudan, for instance–before we can justify assaults on Iran or North Korea. We must solidify the good will of civilized nations, not because they are right, but because we must find a strategy that affords us the longest momentum. We cannot lose the war of public or global opinion if we are to continue fighting, otherwise the average American will eventually grow disgusted and give up, as is the case now with many voters over Iraq.

Beyond this we must pay more heed to our experienced military leaders in the planning and execution of future conflicts. Iraq was badly mishandled in the first phases of rebuilding. The security situation was pathetic at best. This is unacceptable, and was the most critical defeat in the policy war against the neoconservative movement.

It is time to polish our idealism with practicality, and to sprinkle mercy and compassion into our global military reach. Hearts and minds are as vital as shock and awe, after all.