BACK TO WORK

After a fine trip to DC (to see Anita, who is now on the path to becoming a lawyer), and stops in New Haven (to see Ryan and Cathy and their newborn), CT (to see mom and dad) and Boston (to see my super cool siblings -- links to follow) I am now back in Oswego ready for the final innings of spring '03.

I'm adding Tom Delay's press releases to my "watch list." My sense is that Delay may be one of the few unambiguous bright spots for the Dems in 2004 -- keep that man in the spotlight. The war debacle-in-progress will be a big issue for the Dems, but they will need to be able to call attention to the failures of this administration without playing the patriotism blame game with the likes of Delay.

SPRING BREAK IS NEARLY GONE

. . .and I haven't finished my reading yet. I will say a few things about Tucker and Hendrickson's Imperial Temptation, though:

• It is astounding how many of the same issues that GWI presented are being replayed in GWII; this is astounding because it seems like the media script that has been running draws a sharp distinction between the two, but Tucker and Hendrickson also present GWI as a "war of choice" and a "preventive war." Further, the WMD threat was more prominent in the discussions surrounding GWI than I remember, at least. In GWI, the focus was more clearly on nuclear weapons, however.


• Tucker and Hendrickson present GWI as providing a new orientation for the American public on the appropriateness of using military force abroad in situations that are neither clearly required by prudential considerations nor clearly in accord with international law. GWI was fought under the idea of a "new world order" in which American military might would protect the existing state system against threats from middle-level powers from the developing world that might use WMD's and terrorism to attain their ends.


• Quote from Bush, the elder: "no negotiations, no compromises, no attempts at face-saving and no rewards for aggression." (Tucker and Hendrickson 39). According to T and H, this understanding of how to deal with preceived threats from countries like Iraq rests on a false understanding of power, one that "abjured the search for reasons that might account for aggressive behavior."


• American power is infused with a universal, moral significance, and the imperative to project American power abroad becomes overwhelming.

T and H see a "pathology" in one particular aspect of the approach that Bush the elder took, however: the idea that we should project an overwhelming amount of force where needed and then leave as soon as possible and let others pick up after us.

We have fastened upon a formula for going to war -- in which American casualties are minimized and protracted engagements are avoided -- that requires the massive use of American firepower and a speedy withdrawal from the scenes of destruction. [. . .] Its peculiar vice is that it enables us to go to war with far greater precipitancy than we otherwise might while simultaneously allowing us to walk away from the ruin we create without feeling a commensurate sense of responsibility. It creates an anarchy and calls it peace. In the name of order, it wreaks havoc. It allows us to assume an imperial role without discharging the classic duties of imperial rule.(162)

It remains to be seen whether or not Bush the younger is planning on altering this formula. The problem with Bush's promised alteration is that it looks too much like classical imperial policy, despite Bush's protestations to the contrary. And as I've continually said here, I really doubt that Bush is serious on this score, although I admit that stranger things have happened than my turning out to have been wrong.

AL JAZEERA IN ENGLISH

Greg Goelzhauser notes that Al Jazeera has an english page up and running. Unfortunately, you'll have to read Greg's summary of the contents of one particular article, rather than the article itself, because some yahoo calling him- or her- or itself "Patriot" has hacked al jazeera's site. Way to go, Patriot. Idiot.

NOTE: Read the ZDNet article on the attack on Al Jazeera's website.

JOSE GUTIERREZ

Siglio XXI (Guatemala) reports on Jose Gutierrez's death, discusses his posthumous attainment of American citizenship, and notes that the military has become an attractive path toward citizenship for latino immigrants. Gutierrez was originally from Guatemala. He was killed in Iraq on Friday and will be buried in Guatemala. Last July, GWB issued an executive order speeding up the naturalization process for members of the military.

One interesting question will be the extent to which the apparent increased need for soldiers can be used as a leverage for other kinds of improvements for immigrant and minority groups, as has often been the case in past wars (see, for example, this discussion of Philip Klinker and Rogers Smith's The Unsteady March).

CHRIS HEDGES

Chris Hedges is very smart. If you haven't read his book yet, you should. If you'd like a taste of his thoughts, go to this interview at TomPaine.com.

OPERATION PULITZER PRIZE

Bailey, my chief of staff, has been fielding questions about one controversial aspect of Operation Pulitzer Prize, which I announced yesterday. I plan to add two chapters to my dissertation but am also cutting my bibliography by 10%. I don't see what the problem is here.

OPERATION PULITZER PRIZE

My chief of staff (Bailey, our pug) has just announced the inception of Operation Pulitzer Prize. The goals of this operation are twofold: (1) to finish my dissertation and (2) win accolades and awards for it. I am working on prepping my coalition for the sustained efforts that will be required in the coming months. I will refer to my main coalition as the "Coalition of the Reading." Later this summer I hope to announce the formation of the "Coalition of the Proofreading" to supplement their efforts.

My predictions for casualties: zero. (Critics will note that I'm not counting long-term eye strain, increased risk of carpel tunnel syndrome, or weight gain.) Do not ask me about cost projections.

VINCENT TRUFFY

Look at his links on the war, on plans for reconstruction, on U.S. foreign policy in the wake of GWII, etc.

A particularly important document on Truffy's reading list is Play to Win, Final Report of the bi-partisan Commission on Post-Conflict Reconstruction (a joint CSIS and AUSA report). The report is an overview of the steps that the commission believes are necessary in any successful effort to create long-term, post-invasion change. Not surprisingly, the report argues that all of these steps are currently underfunded:

In the security realm disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration efforts (DDR) are underfunded, as is short-term support for non-American troops or police who might be deployed in lieu of American troops or police (as with Turkey’s deployment in Afghanistan). In the area of justice and reconciliation, little money is available to field an emergency justice package, deploy human rights monitors, or support reconciliation efforts at the national or local level. In the economic and social arena, little fast and flexible funding is available to jumpstart economies, provide temporary employment, reverse brain drain, or address pressing social needs. In the area of governance and participation, no money is available to support national “constituting processes” (such as the loya jirga in Afghanistan) and civil administration needs (including funding recurrent costs during the transition period).

This point needs to be hammered home at every opportunity. The Bush administration has shown only a willingness to fight the wars necessary to implement its new national security strategies, not a willingness to pay for the wars and the post-war operations necessary to implement these strategies. Especially if you're a deficit hawk (like Josh Chafetz over at Oxblog), you should be concerned about this facet of Bush's policymaking, which constitutes a de facto retraction of the promises that attracted liberal hawks to the war effort in the first place. I am amazed at how irresponsible Bush's approach to the budget is, and astounded at how willing the press has been willing to give him a pass here.

If you want to read a little about the effects of deficits on the economy, go to this page at Brookings. Deficits are bad over the long term, but it's politically difficult to lay the groundwork for lower deficits given current political commitments. To reduce deficits, you need to raise taxes or decrease spending, not lower taxes and increase spending, as Mr. Bush and his allies in the House and Senate have been doing lately. I would also hazard a guess that if the spending choice turns out to be a choice between funding prescription drugs for seniors and helping establish democratic and security institutions in some foreign land, seniors will win.

At some point, the patriotism rush will subside and this administration will stand accused of rank fiscal irresponsibility, and I hope that the Democrats are smart enough to take advantage of the issue.

WHAT IS AARON BROWN'S PROBLEM?

I just watched CNN's Aaron Brown bitching out the Washington bureau chief of Al-Jazeera for airing footage of slain and captured American soldiers. I haven't followed the story, but this whole thing makes me very nervous. CNN's version of the war so far is not the version that the rest of the world is seeing. If you're not persuaded of that fact, go to Spain's El Mundo (for example) and see the pictures of civilian and American casualties that the Pentagon does not want you to see and that CNN does not want to air, for reasons that you may in fact believe are decent or laudable. While the American version of the war shows smiling and relieved refugees, however, the rest of the world is seeing pictures of civilian and American casualties.

I agree with Atrios that what CNN has been showing (what I've seen of it) is "war porn": gratuitous pictures of war violence that have a certain kind of obscenity about them. I don't think that El Mundo's coverage is necessarily any different (I'm not really sure). But we kid ourselves if we think that we are seeing the same images of the war as the rest of the world; in the rest of the world, brutal pictures of both civilian and military casualties are circulating; instead of having an incentive to prove the administration's claims about the surgical nature of the war, other media outlets have incentives to disprove their claims. And now Aaron Brown and the CNN staff are explicitly (rather than in a subtle fashion) toeing the adminstration's line on war coverage, acting like the administration's attack dogs. That's sad. Not particularly unexpected, but sad nonetheless.

NOTE: Kieran Healy picks up on this as well and also has excerpts from the transcript. From Atrios.

See also the comments at the Wage Slave Journal.

SPRING BREAK READING LIST

One obvious choice and two less obvious ones. The first: Chris Hedges, War is a Force that Gives Us Meaning. Hedges's critique of the media construction of the war effort is pertinent right now. The others: Ira Strauber, Neglected Policies: Constitutional Law and Legal Commentary as Civic Education (Duke UP 2002), and Robert Tucker and David Hendrickson, The Imperial Temptation: The New World Order and America's Purpose (CFR 1992)

Strauber's book is an extended defense of what he calls "agnostic skepticism," which Strauber develops as as approach to teaching cases, an approach that he hopes will serve the broad purpose of encouraging habits of thought advantageous for the development of critical and thoughtful citizens.

Tucker and Hendrickson's book is an analysis of the implications of the first Gulf War on American approaches to the use of force abroad. As the title suggests, the authors view the first Gulf War as a dangerous precedent. Because much of what they say is quite prescient, I'll spend some time over the next week reporting on their argument and how GWII illustrates and challenges their arguments.

COINCIDENCE?

Is it coincidence that I can't get on to Al Jazeera's website at this particular moment? I've gotten "Gateway Error" messages. Try it yourself.

IN D.C. FOR SPRING BREAK

Aside from the big, flashing signs on I-83 and I-95, I haven't noticed any special security precautions. I drove across the Key Bridge, through Georgetown to within three blocks from the Executive Office building, then along the northwestern side of the mall, across the Potomac and took the GW Parkway up to the beltway and into Bethesda. I'm certainly not saying that there are no special precautions, just that this casual visitor to downtown DC does not immediately notice them.