September began with 140,000 American troops in Iraq -- 13,000 more
than in late July.
Almost 30 months have passed since Time magazine’s mid-April 2004
cover story, “No Easy Options,” reported that “foreign policy luminaries
from both parties say a precipitous U.S. withdrawal would cripple
American credibility, doom reform in the Arab world and turn Iraq into a
playground for terrorists and the armies of neighboring states like Iran
and Syria.”
Back then, according to the USA’s largest-circulation newsmagazine,
“the most” that the president could hope for was that “some kind of
elected Iraqi government will eventually emerge from the wreckage, at
which point the U.S. could conceivably reduce the number of its troops
significantly. But getting there requires a commitment of at least
several more months of American blood and treasure.”
As I noted in my book War Made Easy, which came off the press nearly
18 months ago, “Hedge words were plentiful: ‘the most’ that could be
hoped for was that ‘some kind’ of elected Iraqi government would
‘eventually emerge,’ at which time the United States ‘could conceivably’
manage to ‘reduce’ its troop level in Iraq ‘significantly,’ although even
that vague hope necessitated a commitment of ‘at least several more
months’ of Americans killing and dying. But in several more months,
predictably, there would still be no end in sight -- just another blank
check for more ‘blood and treasure,’ on the installment plan.”
President Bush keeps demanding those blank checks, and Congress
keeps cutting them. What Martin Luther King Jr. called “the madness of
militarism” provides ample justifications. For Bush, one of them involves
couching the choices ahead in military terms -- to be best judged by
military leaders. This is, in essence, an effort to short-circuit
democracy.
Bush likes to tell reporters that U.S. troop levels in Iraq hinge on
the assessments from top military commanders. This explanation is so
familiar that it’s hardly newsworthy. But journalists -- and the
public -- should take a hard look at that rhetorical scam.
Civilian control of the military means that the president is
accountable to citizens, not generals. But -- despite the growing
opposition to the Iraq war, as reflected in national opinion polls -- the
president fervently declares his commitment to the U.S. war effort.
Rather than directly proclaim that he will ignore public opinion, Bush
prefers to shift the discussion from domestic political accountability to
ostensible military necessity.
That’s where the it’s-up-to-the-generals gambit comes in. As soon as
the question is re-framed around what multi-star generals say, a closed
loop turns into a tightening noose. And a fraud. After all, until the
moment of retirement, the generals are in a chain of command -- with the
president, as commander in chief, at the top.
The president’s claim that key deployment decisions rest in the
hands of military chiefs is not only a dodge. It’s also manipulative --
shoving public discourse toward the mindset of assessing military tactics
instead of ethical choices. And the claim dangerously encourages the idea
that military leaders should have a major say in U.S. foreign-policy
decisions.
Most of the time, the shift of responsibility is a subtle matter.
But sometimes it’s quite flagrant. Either way, the news media often play
along with the abuse of the democratic process.
More than two years ago, in early May 2004, confirmation emerged
that U.S. troop deployments would stay higher and longer in Iraq than
previously stated. The New York Times reported the story under the
headline “U.S. Commander to Keep 135,000 Troops in Iraq Through 2005.”
Such headlines marked the success of efforts to portray the
troop-level decisions as military calculations rather than presidential
choices. And the spin wasn’t only coming from the headline writer. “The
commander of American forces in the Middle East, putting on hold the goal
of reducing troops in Iraq, plans to keep at least 135,000 soldiers there
through 2005, Pentagon and military officials said,” the Times lead
reported.
Fast forward more than two years, to a story that broke last month.
The Associated Press reported on ascending U.S. troop totals in Iraq:
“The increase comes as the U.S. Marine Corps is preparing to order
thousands of its troops to active duty in the first involuntary recall
since the early days of the war.” The explanation from the head of the
Marines’ manpower mobilization, Col. Guy A. Stratton, was telling. “Since
this is going to be a long war,” he said, “we thought it was judicious
and prudent at this time to be able to use a relatively small portion of
those Marines to help us augment our units.”
But it’s not up to military officers to decide whether this is going
to be a long war. Under the Constitution, in theory, the president and
Congress share that power -- derived from the consent of the governed. We
must hold the president and Congress accountable.
______________________________
The paperback edition of Norman Solomon’s latest book, War Made Easy: How
Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death, was published this
summer. For information, go to:
www.warmadeeasy.com