I’ve been working hard on a big article on transitional justice this past week. So I know I’ve been a bit AWOL from writing about Iraq here. (But I tried to do my bit on Israel/Palestine.)
I wish I’d written more about my admiration for Cindy Sheehan, who is one heck of an inspiring woman who has succeeded in crystallizing and helping to spearhead the rising tide of anti-war feeling here in the US. (She and I were in touch just a bit back last year when she got started… And she’s been getting a bit of help from some Quakers down there in Crawford, TX.) I gather she had to fly back to California to look after her mom.
Godspeed to you, dear Cindy.
Wednesday evening we had a lovely solidarity vigil for Cindy here in Charlottesville, Virginia. Some amazing things about it: nobody really organized it. Someone picked the spot; Sue, who sends out the email alerts for our local Peace Center, put it out on her alert system; and more than 200 folks showed up.
Most of us “peace demo” stalwarts didn’t know half the people there! (In other words, there were lots and lots of new faces.) Also, given how last-minute and chaotic the arrangements were, lots of peace-demo stalwarts actually never did hear about it in time. Oh well…
Thursday, we did our regular evening rush-hour vigil, too; and we got a fabulous response from the passing drivers. At times more than half the drivers were giving us supportive honks, and sometimes the whole intersection broke out into competitive klaxoning.
Today, Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, who received two Purple Hearts and other military honors for his service in Vietnam, reiterated his position that the United States needs to develop a strategy to leave Iraq:
- Hagel scoffed at the idea that U.S. troops could be in Iraq four years from now at levels above 100,000, a contingency for which the Pentagon is preparing.
“We should start figuring out how we get out of there,” Hagel said on “This Week” on ABC. “But with this understanding, we cannot leave a vacuum that further destabilizes the Middle East. I think our involvement there has destabilized the Middle East. And the longer we stay there, I think the further destabilization will occur.”
Hagel said “stay the course” is not a policy. “By any standard, when you analyze 2 1/2 years in Iraq
“we cannot leave a vacuum that further destabilizes the Middle East…the longer we stay there, I think the further destabilization will occur.”
Although I am happy to hear the Senator – or anyone else for that matter – so strongly stating the reality in Iraq, but this sounds a bit contradictory.
the way i read it, he’s admitting that the ME already has been destabilized some by the US presence in Iraq-=- no avoiding that!– but he’s warning strongly further destabilization, i.e. by staying there longer…
It’s a fairly good position because it rightly recognizes that even if the US does pull out right now there will be some violence and chaos in Iraq (and beyond?)
This is quite a switch for Hagel, who just over a year ago suggested we needed a draft. (I address this at greater length at the ‘politics’ section of my own blog).
I think that the foreign policy elites in Washington are finally coming to realize that the United States can not win in Iraq. Some of the less blinkered like Hagel know that the US has, in fact, already lost the Iraq war. They won’t say it quite so bluntly, so instead we will hear phrases like ‘we’re not winning’, or ‘the insurgency will be defeated by the Iraqis, not the US’.
They seem to be well behind the military who have recognized all this for some time now. Hagel’s comments suggest to me that he is worried that Bush’s inability to come to terms with the reality of defeat will end up doing much greater long term damage to the US military.
Habemus Constitution. White smoke in Iraq.
David
Helena, I surmise you are referring to Andrew Parasiliti, as Hagel’s long time foreign affairs advisor — and close Iraq observer.
However, I just learned Parasiliti apparently is no longer with Hagel, having flown the coop to join Amb. Robert Blackwill.
http://www.bgrdc.com/people.html
Curious that Hagel’s willingness to break the Reagan commandment (about not criticizing fellow Republicans) and his increasingly candid zingers aimed at Cheney & Rumsfeld re. Iraq emerge with Andrew no longer “in house.” Perhaps just a spurious association…?
Then again, perhaps Helena you were referring to a new Hagel aide?