EFL and registration required so magic URL.
President George W Bush was sent a public manifesto yesterday by Washington’s hawks, demanding regime change in Syria and Iran and a Cuba-style military blockade of North Korea backed by planning for a pre-emptive strike on its nuclear sites. The manifesto, presented as a "manual for victory" in the war on terror, also calls for Saudi Arabia and France to be treated not as allies but as rivals and possibly enemies. The manifesto is contained in a new book by Richard Perle, a Pentagon adviser and "intellectual guru" of the hardline neo-conservative movement, and David Frum, a former Bush speechwriter. They give warning of a faltering of the "will to win" in Washington. In the battle for the president’s ear, the manifesto represents an attempt by hawks to break out of the post-Iraq doldrums and strike back at what they see as a campaign of hostile leaking by their foes in such centres of caution as the State Department or in the military top brass.
| That's making the assumption there's such a thing as "post-Iraq doldrums." Somebody who writes for a newspaper to making such an assumption shows they don't really read the papers they write for... |
Their publication, An End to Evil: How to Win the War on Terror, coincided with the latest broadside from the hawks’ enemy number one, Colin Powell, the secretary of state. Though on leave recovering from a prostate cancer operation, Mr Powell summoned reporters to his bedside to hail "encouraging" signs of a "new attitude" in Iran and call for the United States to keep open the prospect of dialogue with the Teheran authorities.
| That's what he's supposed to do. If you've been paying attention, you've noticed that we've had significant diplomatic victories in the past month. They don't come without wagging jaws at each other. If the ayatollahs can be induced to do a Khadaffy, then we don't have to spend the money to send the military there, do we? |
Such talk is anathema to hawks like Mr Perle and Mr Frum who urge Washington to shun the mullahs and work for their overthrow in concert with Iranian dissidents.
| I suspect the book's part of the diplo offensive. I'll bet it doesn't come as a surprise to Powell. |
Such officials prevailed over invading Afghanistan and Iraq, but have been seen as on the back foot since the autumn as their post-war visions of building a secular, free-market Iraq were scaled back in favour of compromise and a swift handover of power next June.
| I think we're on a schedule here. Somebody's got a PERT chart, with all the dependencies worked out on a timetable. The military's got to come out of Iraq for rest, relaxation, and refitting. Otherwise, we have no credible tool to whack whomever's next on the list. Whacking the next candidate on the list feeds back to Iraq and Afghanistan, making reform and restructure easier. Expect to see us making some serious faces at somebody next September — not because of the elections, but because the timetable says to up the pressure around then, for possible hostilities sometime early- to mid-2005. |
The book demands that any talks with North Korea require the complete and immediate abandonment of its nuclear programme. As North Korea will probably refuse such terms, the book urges a Cuba-style military blockade and overt preparations for war, including the rapid pullback of US forces from the inter-Korean border so that they move out of range of North Korean artillery. Such steps, with luck, will prompt China to oust its nominal ally, Kim Jong-il, and install a saner regime in North Korea, the authors write.
| Thereby saving us a passle of money, by the way... |
The authoritarian rule of Syria’s leader, Bashar Assad, should also be ended, encouraged by shutting oil supplies from Iraq, seizing arms he buys from Iran, and raids into Syria to hunt terrorists.
| I think Syria might be the weak link in the Axis of Almost as Evil, or have taken Iraq's place on the big list... |
The authors urge Mr Bush to "tell the truth about Saudi Arabia". Wealthy Saudis, some of them royal princes, fund al-Qa’eda, they write. The Saudi government backs "terror-tainted Islamic organisations" as part of a larger campaign to "spread its extremist version of Islam throughout the Muslim world and into Europe and North America".
| We can do that, to push them into reforming and taking its consequences, or we can declare war on the Islamic world as we invade them. Which is preferable? |
The book calls for tough action against France and its dreams of offsetting US power. "We should force European governments to choose between Paris and Washington," it states. Britain’s independence from Europe should be preserved, perhaps with open access for British arms to American defence markets.
All good stuff! Definitely gets my vote. I disagree that rapid transition to a new Iraqi government is a sign of failure. We should hand over running Iraq to an elected government as soon as possible and leave enough troops to stop a military coup. Sure they will make mistakes, but i think a return to dictatorship is very unlikely, especially after Saddam’s trial. |