Third Way Dispatch

“Generals raise fears of civil war”—that’s the headline on the breaking news right now. Head of the US Central Command, General John Abizaid, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Peter Pace, just told the Senate Armed Services Committee that sectarian violence in Iraq is getting worse, with the very real danger of a civil war.

Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld was also there, even though yesterday he vowed he would only brief the senators behind closed doors. Yesterday, he also said that sectarian violence in Iraq is not a “classic civil war.”

A classic civil war? What does that mean? That the combatants have to use lead shot and reenact the Battle of Gettysburg? It seems to me that we have internal factions in an increasingly violent struggle for territory and national wealth – that’s pretty classic.

Rumsfeld is consistent, at any rate. He’s made bad decision after bad decision, working hard to cover his tracks with secrecy, denial, and blame shifting.

But it’s not working anymore. Reality is catching up: the situation in Iraq is dire and getting worse, and Americans all over the country have a sense of urgency about this, even if Donald Rumsfeld doesn’t.

And for good reason – it’s high time for honesty and accountability. In fact, if anything, time has just about run out for Iraq, as Generals Abizaid and Pace noted. That’s why it’s so important that progressives take a strong stand right now.

The Bush Administration and its allies on the Hill have pursued a cynical strategy of hiding their failures by blaming their political opponents – and they’ve gotten away with it far too often. Progressives must push back – and Third Way just released a new memo, “Addressing Iraq in a Charged Political Environment,” which can help them to do so.

The memo makes the case that progressives have been defensive and largely allowed the Bush Administration and its kept Congress to define the terms of the debate. The first thing progressives can do to put a stop to this is hold conservatives accountable. They are the ones, after all, who have made or aided and abetted all of the bad decisions.

Progressives should challenge their opponents head on. The fact is, those in the majority are either satisfied with the status quo or they’re not. If they’re satisfied, that means they have no problem with everything from the shortage of body armor for our troops to the Bush Administration’s lack of planning for securing the peace in Iraq. If they’re not satisfied, they haven’t been effective in providing oversight and influencing the policy, even though they’re in the majority party.

Progressives also need to offer a clear alternative. There is a range of views about what that alternative should be, and that’s fine – there is more than one good answer to a complex challenge. But whatever plan progressives offer, we must be able to explain how it protects and advances American national security. If we can’t do that, it’s not a good plan.

Third Way has recommendations for the elements of a good plan, which are posted on our website. Basically, we’d like to see the President embrace a successful counter-insurgency strategy, one that puts more emphasis on training Iraqi forces and phasing out US combat forces. We should not have a permanent presence in Iraq.

Oh, and we think it’s time for a change at the top. But it’s not all bad news for Donald Rumsfeld – the local civil war reenactment groups can always use another soldier. As long as they don’t put him in charge of anything, that is – we wouldn’t want the Union Army to lose this time.