Is Bush finally getting it right on Iraq?

Is George Bush finally getting it right on Iraq? There are some encouraging signs that realism is taking hold at the White House.

It should be no secret (from my writings here at least) that I was a bitter opponent of the Iraq war. It was a dangerous stunt, unrelated to the events of 9/11, that George Bush let himself get talked into, by neocons intent on the same thrill kids get playing “SimCity” or “Age of Empires” (but who spend tens of billons fewer getting that thrill, and kill nowhere near as many innocents.)

But now that he is there, he is starting to see that the neocon “flatten them at all costs” rhetoric that wants to make Iraq a showcase example of American imperial power makes no strategic sense.

If the aim is to bring about a stable, moderately democratic government in Iraq, then the coalition has one job right now - ensure that the country and government stabilizes. Bush’s deals in Fallujah and Najaf may seem weak to neocons, but they make exquisite sense - if neither situation threatened the larger potential for Iraq to become a sovereign state, then why pursue it further? The insurgents are capable of little other than delivering bee stings, hoping to inflict a death by a thousand cuts.

If the US stays focused on the transfer of sovereignty, and worries a lot less about the outcome of that sovereignty (Bremer’s wasted year of rewriting all of Iraq’s laws on commerce, trade, and foreign investment, which will undoubtedly be swept aside by the Iraqis themselves at some future date), then its more modest aims of leaving a viable state will have a chance for success.

And many fewer lives will be lost. I still hate this war, but at least the brutal neocon fantasies of reshaping Iraq appear to be losing their influence on the President. Colin Powell's doctrine of overwhelming force, clear mission, and focused exit strategy may finally be getting a hearing.