Failure of the Bush Doctrine
There’s an interesting piece in The Monitor that asks whether or not the Bush Doctrine has failed. A variety of viewpoints are presented, but I do think it’s fair to say that the answer to that question is “yes”. The article then goes on to present the case made by some analysts that this conflict may present the end of western military dominance in the region. The basis for this is the notion that there’s a new “islamist” way of waging military resistance that cannot be defeated by conventional military tactics.
Hogwash.
I almost hate to say it, because it would be nice if it were true, but the “problem” here isn’t an end to western military dominance. The problem is the utopian neo-con abandonment of realpolitik for their special brand of faith based foreign policy. Some future U.S. president, wtih our intelligence and foreign policy establishments behind him will find a local proxy. That local proxy and his ethnic, religious, or ideological compatriots will have no difficulty doing the kind of horrifying brutality that sickens us when we can fool ourselves into believing that it’s “isolated incidents” of bad behavior by our troops. It’s what we’ve done so masterfully for a good 120 years or so now.
The American people don’t think of themselves as brutal oppressors and don’t want to think of themselves that way. We can maintain our self-image by letting others do the dirty work. The shift that came with the Bush Doctrine wasn’t preemption. Our whole empire is based on preemption. We just normally do it by proxy.
