Posted on 02/09/2005 5:24:47 AM PST by Gengis Khan
A simple ‘sorry’ will do
On Iraq, it is now time for critics to own up
JAITHIRTH RAO
It is quite in order to apologise. I remember, I remember. I remember the pessimistic prophecies of large sections of the media in the US and Britain. “The US will get stuck in a quagmire in Afghanistan. Look what happened to the British and the Soviets. This is a land war. You cannot rely on bombing as they did in Kosovo. Once the casualties start, public opinion in the US will turn against the war. Americans have no stomach for body-bags.”
“Kabul will never fall. The Pushtuns will resist. The northern insurgents will be of no help.”
“Kabul may have fallen, but Kandahar is another matter. They will fight so hard. American troops will be stuck there.”
“Afghanistan was easy. Iraq is another matter. Coalition troops will get trapped on the long, hot road to Baghdad. Supply lines will not hold.”
“Entry into Iraq may have been easy. But once they get to the outskirts of Baghdad, the Republican Guard will fight fiercely.”
“Once inside Baghdad, there will be door-to-door fighting. It will be an impossible trap.”
“The Shias will never agree to a constitution where they do not dominate. The Islamists will never agree to a constitution where women have the right to vote. The Sunnis will definitely sabotage any election where their pre-eminence is threatened.”
I think it is now time for the media pundits to apologise. They do not need to be very profuse. A simple “sorry” will suffice. In classical Greek traditions, Cassandra was a prophetess who prophesied bad outcomes and was always right — but who was never believed. I guess we can call these contemporary self-appointed experts anti-Cassandras in so far as they are believed when they prophesy bad outcomes, but who at least until now have always been wrong. In war-time those who spread defeatism and constantly predict military failures for their own side can be with some justification accused of aiding and abetting the enemy. I for one do not think state-funded agencies like the BBC should be accused of treason. After all free speech is a right that is more or less derived from the Magna Carta and goes back some eight hundred years!
I am not suggesting that everything about the Iraq war has been correct. There were moral dilemmas to start with. Was Saddam a threat significant enough to be dealt with by war? Peace always sounds morally superior. It is also usually politically popular. (Remember Neville Chamberlain was very popular, for a while!) Not finding the Weapons of Mass Destruction was a profound problem as it highlighted weaknesses in the intelligence apparatus of the world’s most advanced powers. It certainly took some of the sheen off the moral advantage that the coalition had going into Iraq. But in practical terms, I felt relieved. The point about pre-emptive action is to go in early before there are WMDs when dealing with a regime that is quite capable and willing to obtain and use WMDs on its neighbours and its citizens. The European advocates of non-interference are particularly worthy of derision. Let us not forget that the Europeans pussyfooted while Bosnian Muslims were under attack and it was only meaningful American intervention that saved the Muslims of Bosnia and Kosovo from more catastrophes.
There have been major executional failures. Abu Ghuraib was an enormously shameful occurrence. It is pertinent to note that several people have been already tried and sentenced. It would be interesting to check out as to how many custodial crimes are investigated, let alone tried or punished, so swiftly in other countries or jurisdictions. Those who live in glass houses should be careful. It is also interesting that it is the free US media that surfaced the shameful episode and there was open inquiry by US legislators, an inquiry that was televised to the whole world, warts and all.
At the other end of the world, the Gaunatanamo detentions have been a major source of angst even to persons like me who are broadly US supporters. Interestingly, here too the system and the due process seem to be working. The US judiciary speaking through the justices of the Supreme Court rejected the contention of the executive branch that, being non-citizens, these detainees did not have the right of legal redress. Again, one wonders how many countries give these rights meaningfully to their own citizens, let alone to non-citizens captured in a combat zone.
There have been other operational failures and mishaps for sure. Need the Iraqi army have been dissolved so soon? Could Al-Sadr have been dealt with more sensibly? Could the elections have been held sooner? And so on.
None of this can take away from the fact that the broad contours of the Anglo-American effort have been reasonably successful so far in achieving both strategic and tactical aims that many in the world share — some openly and candidly, some silently and furtively lest they jump into the well of political incorrectness. It is however too soon and quite silly to declare victory. An enterprise of this kind and magnitude involves enormous risks and great uncertainties. While playing Cassandra is not desirable, neither is a naive optimism justified.
Much may still go wrong. The ground situation in Iraq could easily deteriorate. The coalition will find itself in a severe dilemma. There is a temptation to cut and run during this post-election high. This might be mis-read as a sign of weakness. The purveyors of violence and beneficiaries of instability will then use this opportunity to escalate their actions and try to plunge Iraq into civil war. On the other hand, when there is instability, there might be a temptation for the coalition forces to intervene with strength. This too could backfire as it would undermine the very basis of the elections where the Iraqi people were given an opportunity to take control of their destiny.
Walking this fine line between staying there and being on call to ensure stability while not intruding too much in order to ensure that the newly elected Iraqi government manages its own destiny, this will take a high order of a complex set of skills not unlike those demonstrated by General MacArthur circa 1945. This time around, hopefully the great pundits of the media will be at least a little more humble if not supportive of the efforts of their governments.
The writer is chairman and CEO, Mphasis. Write to him at jerryrao@expressindia.com
So they owe the U.S. an apology. Duh.
Bump
I ain't gonna hold my breath. They'll just move on to the next anti-American cause, as they always do.
One thing I've learned for certain and that is media pundits do not apologise for anything or admit error in anything. They simply slap a new coat of paint over their already highly layered pile of bull sh*t and move on with their distorted agenda.
Agenda is the key word here and it's why they are NEVER wrong..
It's what they do..
It's ALL they do..
and they won't stop...
EVER!
(....sound of crickets chirping....)
One thing I learned from my public speaking prof in college was that if you slip up making a speech, not to make it a larger event of it by apologizing for it.
She pointed out that if you see a new newscaster making mistakes and they start drawing attention to them by apologizing, they will be off the air in no time.
Since then, I've watched for it and its true. Veteran newscasters never apologize, and rookies who do are gone in no time.
Well at least the Indian media and the India people realises what the US has done for the World and someone had the courage to apologise on behalf of the rest.
I appreciate your article GK.
Prairie
That is not true. The military began investigating it two months before the MSM picked it up. They even issued a press release. The MSM did not care until they had pictures.
Correct, and if you read the article there isn't much of an apology. Kinda like "We're sorry, but we were right on everything". The usual horse crap.
Gotta love the stupid LIBs that try to equate Abu Ghuraib with Auschwitz...These idiots are beyond contempt!
The pictures were released by defense attorneys for the perpetrators of the crimes. They got them to CBS NEWS and Seymour Hersch, who each had an agenda beyond restoring proper order and prisoner treatment at abu Graib.
India is the most pro-U.S nation in Asia and they are natural allies of the USA. They have faced Islamofascism for 1000 years and most of them are very appreciative of the courageous stance the US has taken.
The single issue which causes some dissension is US support for Pakistan which is really the military epicenter of global terrorism. The ISI of Pakistan is directly responsible for nuclear proliferation in the middle east and they have harbored terrorists for years. If the US ever adjusts its stance on Pakistan they will win over the remaining Indians and a billion people in your corner is a strong position to be in because public opinion does matter in world diplomacy.
Thanks for posting this.
*Chuckle*
As in, "You put the M-PHAsis on the wrong syLLAble."
Great Article Gengis.. Thanks
now.. let's see what we can do to get YOUR journalists over here to teach our egotistical & headstrong media some good old fashioned manners.
I love how the Indians have evolved since the end of the Cold War. And they're getting that 60k+ ton Russian aircraft carrier. But the Euro-centric media here never bothers to notice. For a country that supposedly has no allies since Bush came to power, India and Japan sure seem okay with the US.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.