Iraq: Consequences of Defeat
June 11th, 2007
By Marc Schulman
Print
In an op-ed in last Thursday’s New York Times, Peter Rodman and William Shawcross take aim at those opponents of the Iraq war who “are toying with the idea of American defeat.” Their most scathing words are directed at critics of the war who take a “strange comfort” from the Vietnam war’s outcome, from which, aver the critics, the U.S. recovered and for which “no lasting price was paid.”
While it’s true that the dominoes didn’t fall, the idea that “no lasting price was paid” is a myth. When the last helicopter lifted off from the rooftop of the our embassy in Saigon, Afghanistan wasn’t on the list of potential falling dominoes. Less than five years after that event and with a American president who had earlier proclaimed that it was time to end our “inordinate fear of communism,” the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. Would they have done so if our involvement in Vietnam had otherwise ended and the ensuing revulsion against the use of force had not taken place? While there’s no categorical answer to this question, common sense argues that one of the most important components of the Soviet leaders’ risk/reward calculations was their perception of how the United States would react to the USSR’s first-ever military intervention outside of Eastern Europe. Our defeat in Vietnam and the subsequent isolationist sentiment made it easier for the Soviets to decide to take the risk.
Without engaging in historical determinism, it’s fair to say that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan set in motion a chain of events that culminated in 9/11. In the minds of bin Laden and his compatriots, the jihadists had defeated one of the world’s two superpowers and were responsible for its collapse. Having destroyed the godless Soviet Union, it was time to take on Judeo-Christian America.
If the Iraq war ends in a fashion similar to the Vietnam war, it’s certain — yes, a certainty — that al-Qaeda will take credit for it. A propaganda campaign of unprecedented proportions would follow. And, for many, the message would be irresistible: within the span of a single generation, the Soviets had been defeated in Afghanistan and the Americans in Iraq. What better evidence could there be that history (and Allah) is on al-Qaeda’s side?
History isn’t a sequence of unconnected chapters. World War I set the stage for World War II; the second of the two world wars prepared the way for the Cold War. While I don’t question the motives of those for whom defeat in Iraq is acceptable (or even desirable), I do question their wisdom. Opposition to our military intervention in Iraq isn’t a justification for countenancing defeat. Unfortunately, this is a widespread sentiment, as these excerpts from letters to the New York Times editors attest:
“The fact is that the United States has already been defeated in this war, that the defeat was predictable, and was in fact predicted even before the invasion. More important than military defeat, the United States has been morally disgraced both for starting the war and for its conduct of the war, unleashing unfathomable levels of death and misery on Iraqis.”
“A continued United States presence in Iraq will be interpreted only as oil theft or, more generally, as obstinate imperialism. Our only just course of action is the long and arduous task of apologizing for our unilateral aggression, offering full reparations for the human disaster we have caused, and, of course, withdrawing our military from Iraq.”
“Peter W. Rodman and William Shawcross are correct to say that losing the war in Iraq will further destabilize the Middle East, but the time to avoid this calamity was before the United States invaded Iraq.”
“America’s defeat in Iraq occurred the moment we decided on a unilateral invasion based on known false information. It already threw the entire Middle East into greater upheaval. It has also diminished our stature as a nation for many years to come, if not forever.”
Bush has been roundly and soundly criticized for ignoring and misjudging the consequences of invading Iraq. That being the case, isn’t it equally important to assess — not sweep under the rug — the consequences of defeat in Iraq?
This entry was posted on Monday, June 11th, 2007 at 2:57 pm and is filed under Radical Islam, War On Terror, Iraq, Afghanistan, Foreign Affairs. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Add New Comment
Thanks. Your comment is awaiting approval by a moderator.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Add New Comment