James Joyner of Outside the Beltway fisks John Kerry’s Sunday op-ed in USA Today. Mr. Joyner’s job is thorough and efficient.
I have one question for Mr. Kerry: why is bringing the troops home your plan? I know that Iraq is a dangerous place. If you want to know how dangerous read My War any day of the week. Are the troops there defending this country as you said you were in Viet Nam in your acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention? Or is it irrelevant to the defense of the country as you said your service in Viet Nam was in your testimony before the Senate in 1971? What are your objectives in the War on Terror? What is your strategy?
If bringing the troops home advances that strategy, by all means bring them home. But if bringing the troops home does not advance that strategy, they should stay. Merely bringing the troops home is neither formulating objectives—the role of the commander-in-chief&mdash nor strategy—the role of the general. It is tactics—the role of the lieutenants and other officers in the field. Mr. Kerry needs to start thinking like Commander-In-Chief and stop thinking like a lieutenant.
One more point on Mr. Kerry’s plan to involve France and Germany in providing security in Iraq. For such a plan to be feasible we need to believe that either France and Germany can be persuaded to act against their national interests, or that they can be persuaded that providing security in Iraq is in their national interests, or that their providing security in Iraq can be made to be in their national interests. As to the last point, my question is how? And does that further your objectives?
I for one believe that France and Germany will cooperate with the U. S. in the War on Terror to the extent that they believe it is in their national interests and not cooperate with the U. S. insofar as they believe it is not in their national interests. To believe otherwise flies in the face of experience and it’s unreasonable to believe otherwise.
