Half Measures

It's hard to find pearls within the dung of David Frum's latest. In his post Frum joins the "9/11 Commission is a dirty Democratic Trick" cabal. His main contention seems to be that Democrats simply haven't done anything to protect against terrorism. But what they did do was ineffective and lacked a "grand strategy." Frum fails to see, however, that the Bush "strategy" (if it can even be called that) is neither grand nor successful. And having a debate about its failure is not a political ploy, it is a matter of the gravest importance.

Frum's assessment contains at least one truth. He's right to criticize the Clinton administration's "whack-a-mole" approach of responding to the half dozen or so substantial terrorist attacks against American targets during the nineties. It's clear, in retrospect, that a more concerted, forceful, and synchronized effort was needed to eradicate the Al Qaeda threat. And yet, Frum and like-minded conservatives aren't exactly clear on what they would have done differently if they controlled the levers of presidential power in the 90's. Also not clear is how they would have dealt with a complacent public while working against an isolationsist, skeptical, and deeply partisan oppostion Congress.

But Frum's not interested in these pesky obstacles to his attacks. He's more interested in manufacturing some supposed distinction between the grit and resolve of Democrats and Republicans. How else to explain Frum's prideful assertion that "the Bush administration did react and react decisively and forcefully after 9/11" (emphasis added). There is an implied and downright laughable notion here that someone other than Bush would have somehow been less decisive and forceful in retaliating against the Taliban after 9/11. This, of course, is hard to imagine.

Even harder to imagine is how Frum so badly misconstrues the "outrage" of former Clinton administration officials. He believes their reaction results from Bush's decisive and forceful response to 9/11 coupled with their recognition that they "did so little when the responsibility to do something belonged to them." Frum can't honestly believe this.

Few people are outraged that Bush retaliated against the Taliban. The outrage results from credible assertions that Bush and his administration had trouble deciding whether to attack a country (Afghanistan) that had some culpability or a country (Iraq) that was blameless in the events of 9/11 . The outrage comes from the lack of significant engagement by principal Bush administration officials on the topic of terrorism in general or Al Qaeda in particular prior to 9/11 despite repeated warnings.

The explanation we've heard over the past few days is that the Bush administration was busy thinking in "bigger and bolder terms" while developing a "grand strategy." Perhaps. But why are Bush defenders limited to this false choice:

The huge dividing line in the debate over terror remains just this: Is the United States engaged in a man-hunt - for bin Laden, for Zawahiri, for the surviving alumni of the al Qaeda training camps? - or is it engaged in a war with the ideas that animated those people and with the new generations of killers who will take up the terrorist mission even if the US were to succeed in extirpating every single terrorist now known to be alive and active? Clarke has aligned himself with one side of that debate - and it's the wrong side

In posing the question Frum demonstrates that he doesn't understand the problem or the solution. Why must we be limited to one or the other? To succeed American policy must do both. Simultaneously. The United States must root out individuals responsible for heinous crimes AND demonstrate that American Ideals offers superior opportunities to those who would do us harm. To succeed in these dual goals America must have the cooperation, assistance, and support of the world community. To seek such support (through diplomacy, the UN, and other means) is not a sign a weakness. It is a sign of intelligence to recognize the manner in which the problem can most effectively be addressed. The Bush administration has demonstrated record of failure on this front. And they appear not to comprehend that their tactics are not only not working, they are further endangering America.