|
01.29.2003
"This is not about oil.
That was very clear. This is not about his father, or an attempt
to show his manhood where his daddy didn't, or any of those silly
suggestions that we're hearing among pundits. This is about America."
-- (Sen. Bob Bennett, R-UT)
What is this all
about, anyway? The State of the Union address has come and gone,
and war now seems an absolute certainty. Troops are massing,
plans are being drafted, and if American soldiers are not on
Iraqi soil by Valentine's Day, I will send a box of candy apology
hearts to the Department of Defense. And yet there seems, despite
massive protests on the one side and desperate entreaties of
support on the other, to be very little clarity in the minds
of many as to why, exactly, the United States is poised to launch
a huge assault on the nation of Iraq.
It seems self-evident
that we cannot trust the administration to tell us the real reasons
for the war. Every approach they have tried has proven to be
an unconvincing flop, from the blatantly absurd claim that Iraq
has affiliated itself with al-Q'aeda to the dubious notion that
Iraq poses a threat to the United States (or anyone, for that
matter), to the undoubtedly true but nonetheless shrug-inducing
fact that Saddam Hussein is a bad man who does terrible things.
The weapons-of-mass-destruction claim was a non-starter from
day one, as evidenced by the fact that, since the nukes and bio-bombs
have stubbornly failed to appear, the White House has gone out
of its way to dismiss the inspectors' findings as of marginal
relevance. Besides, no one seriously believes we have a problem
with oppressive, evil governments having megadeath weapons; invasions
of Pakistan, China, India and Israel are not thought to be in
the works. Nor do we seem to be in any hurry to apply the logic
that defiance of UN rulings constitutes grounds for military
action against Israel or Indonesia or North Korea (or, for that
matter, the United States, who defies UN rulings the way kids
eat candy). In the end, the hawks are capable of no more solid
a justification for war than Sen. Bennett's nebulous "this
is about America" utterance.
Nor do the paid-for talking
heads of the right seem to be winning converts the world over.
The party line in that camp is that September 11th was our Pearl
Harbor, and those who urge patience and diplomacy in Iraq are
like those who would have sent Hitler a strongly worded letter
deploring the fall of France. This has convinced no one; the
link between Iraq and al-Q'aeda has not been made, and what's
more, was not necessary in 1941, when the planes that rained
death on America clearly bore the standard of Imperial Japan.
By January of 1942, the Axis had already decimated most of Europe
and forcibly seized the whole of the Pacific Rim; Iraq and al-Q'aeda,
connected or not, has spent the intervening time since September
of 2001 starving to death and hiding. The Greatest Generation
talk is a wash when placed over the template of the war on terror,
it seems.
But, neither does the
rhetoric of the left have much power have much weight when it
comes to explaining why we're off to war. Sen. Bennett, who is
almost never right about anything, is right when he characterizes
the claims that this war is some sort o exercise in paternal
vengeance as "silly". It's the sort of armchair psychotherapy
that many in the left are enamored of, but it's every bit as
stupid as the armchair strategy of the right. The idea that this
is little more than a high-stakes pissing contest, while slightly
more sophisticated and accurate, is still an oversimplistic bit
of half-educated psychology; it attempt to place a complex and
multifaceted situation into a prefabricated box far too small
to hold it.
And, as was the case in
the last war, it's not about oil. To be fair, it's not not
about oil; as the curiously public utterances of Colin Powell
over the last week have made clear, we will be all too happy
to remove the burden of all that crude from the oppressed people
of Iraq. We may not be ready to rain destruction on the minarets
of Baghdad just for oil -- if that was the only motivation, we'd
be attacking Canada, Mexico and Saudi Arabia first -- but we'll
be more than happy to get it. But as before, "blood for
oil" is less a statement of fact or even a shorthand for
the economics of war than it is pure sloganeering. It's not the
truth; it's not even a particularly good summary of the truth.
It's a chant, a phrase to put on t-shirts, a banner to march
beneath.
So why are we going to
war? As is often the case, the real truth is a horrible, sprawling,
difficult mess. It's a tangle of history, diplomacy, economy
and politics that may never be sorted out. Part of it is pure
power politics; there is more than a sniff of simply wanting
to establish exactly who is in charge around here, and exactly
who it is that will decide what does and does not get done. Part
of it is simply institutional stubornness; as with in many big
businesses, a decision was simply made, and that decision will
be carried out to its final conclusion, no matter how unwise
it appears to be along the way. Part of it is a long-term American
imperialism; the war will vouchsafe this and future administrations
a number of useful foreign military bases, a precedent-setting
justification for intervention, and a bloated defense budget.
There are other factors, from the economic (oil, of course, as
well as deficit spending and a sop to Bush's friends in the defense
industry) to the social (a war is forever the cure for domestic
social turmoil) to the political (a wartime leader is a popular
leader). But there is no one simple one, not these, not any.
Probably not even the administration knows with certainty why
they're sending out the troops.
And that's too bad. Because
if there's anything that deserves a simple explanation, it's
a war.
Holy Christ alfuckingmighty.
The one-year anniversary of the Ludic Log is a mere heartbeat
away! Help us celebrate by sending questions, suggestions, requests,
criticisms or praise, using the e-mail link below. The best will
be answered in this very space, starting Monday.
|