All hail the fall of the neocons

The News Virginian / News Virginian
Published: December 30, 2007

Here is something worth celebrating at the dawn of a new year: the ebb of neoconservatism, the dread movement that brought us war in Iraq and other lesser maladies. Evidence of neoconservatism's wane abounds in the Middle East, and specifically Israel, where Bush policies have shifted back to the multilateralism that long had dominated U.S. efforts to stabilize the region.

This translates to an implicit acknowledgement on the part of American policymakers that sheer U.S. might no longer is viewed as an answer to the complex riddle of how to bring peace to a place where violence reins. Such thinking, with its emphasis on the necessity of preemptive action, precipitated our foray into Iraq to results that still must be considered disastrous despite the modest success of the troop surge.

Neocons' aims were commendable: seeking to bring democracy, free enterprise and freedom itself to a region where oppression, tyranny and terrorism rule. In Pakistan, which bridges South Asia, Central Asia and the Middle East, we received a horrific reminder Thursday of terror's abiding prevalence. The assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, recognized as both a champion of democracy and consummate - and likely corrupt - politician, demonstrates the physical and intellectual perils of endeavoring to compel stability in a place that refuses it.

Bhutto's supporters lay blame on Pakistan's Pervez Musharraf-led government. At best, they say, the government failed to protect the charismatic secular opposition leader. Musharraf, meanwhile, pins responsibility on al-Qaida. Bhutto had been running for a seat on parliament and had been unflinching in her criticism of the growingly unpopular Musharraf. The killing provides Musharraf with a potentially sufficient excuse to call off Jan. 8 elections and an opportunity to prolong his stay in power.

For Bush, the immediate consequence is further unraveling of an already threadbare link in his war on terror. Pakistan is home to a powerful nuclear arsenal and leaders from both al-Qaida and the resurgent Taliban. America has given Pakistan billions of dollars since Sept. 11, 2001, forging a fragile alliance with the country tucked on Afghanistan's eastern border. Bhutto's slaying is another indictment on the inefficacy of U.S. efforts to quell the chaos and contain extremists.

It also is another testament to the hubris of neocons' foreign policy. Neither American military power in Iraq nor money in Pakistan has stemmed the rushing tide of uncertainty in those places. The images of rubble and unrest have only grown more common since U.S. tanks rolled into Baghdad.

Certainly, a military response to the terrorist attacks was not only warranted, but necessary. Many long have considered the establishment of democracy in the Middle East as the way to cut the fuse on the powder keg that region represents. Neocons seized on that thinking as the way to prevent a repeat of 9/11, and they took it a step further, seeking to use force where diplomacy had failed. The keg only has grown more volatile.

We neither condemn neocons' aims nor pretend to know the path to tranquility in the world's most dangerous place. But the results of our attempts to create peace by force are in. Neoconservatism, as a result, is out. Good riddance. Extending our military reach deep into the Middle East and our money into Pakistan has made us neither safer nor stronger.

Conventional diplomacy might not produce palpable change in the region, but at least we will not be militarily weaker for having tried. America is best served by safeguarding her own borders, investing in her own resources and utilizing her forces only when the objectives are clearly and militarily definable.