March 2003
NOtesonlinea newsletter for the social democratic community in the United States
|
SD Resolution Inspires Letter to Bush
Urged on by members and friends who liked the SD's resolution on Democracy and Iraq, Penn Kemble and Rachelle Horowitz drafted a letter to President Bush urging him publicly to put forward a plan for democracy in post-war Iraq. With endorsements and amendments from several other democracy promoters, left and right, our draft was circulated to an array of prospective signers. We were impressed by how many quickly gave their names. (See the letter and full list of signers below.)
The letter argues that debate on Iraq has been constrained by a narrow focus on diplomatic legalism and weapons talk. An issue that should be central -- the human rights and democratic possibilities of the people of Iraq and the Middle East -- has been edged aside. This allows too much moral high ground to what styles itself as an anti-war movement. (Where were these people when Saddam was piling up his Iranian, Kuwaiti and Iraqi victims?)
Exactly 24 hours after our letter was delivered to the White House the President went to the American Enterprise Institute dinner and made a major speech about democracy in Iraq and the Islamic world. Mere coincidence? Not entirely. We did hurry our letter over when we learned that the speech was being scheduled -- evidently some people inside the administration were thinking along the same lines we were. The foreign affairs community was abuzz with discussion about the issues our letter reflected, and we contributed something to the buzz.
President Bush's affirmation that Iraq "is fully capable of moving toward democracy," and that a "peaceful and democratic Palestine" is necessary to an Arab/Israeli accord, is welcome movement away from the scorn for "nation-building" and standoffishness toward the Middle East that marked the first year of his term.
It may well be that the U.S. and such friends as we have are now embarked on a generation-long odyssey to re-shape politics and government in a part of the world that has steadily grown more chaotic and fearsome. It's either that, or watch this region -- and, if September 11 is a portent, maybe some of us as well -- go up in flames. If we are going to get through this, some in the political class are going to have to pull together. Maybe the signers of the letter below will provide a small start.
Dear Mr. President:
We write because we share the view that it is essential to bring Saddam Hussein's dictatorship in Iraq to an early end. Broad and bi-partisan support at home -- not simply passive assent -- must be sought for this objective. It is a deeply serious undertaking, with great risks, heavy costs and long-lasting responsibilities. Steps are also needed to respond to misconceptions abroad about the underlying causes of this conflict and your purposes that feed an ugly anti-Americanism. We must act alone if that proves necessary, but first we must do all we can to win allies.
We believe you can now alter the course of this debate by making a clear and specific statement about your plans for helping to lay a foundation for representative government, freedom of speech, human rights and the rule of law in Iraq. Time and again, the commitment to human rights and democracy has been the saving grace of American foreign policy.
The legal and procedural issues now before the United Nations are immensely important. The threat Iraq and its weapons pose to us and to others is truly grave. But attention to these matters must not allow us to lose sight of the vast and continuing cruelty of Saddam Hussein's rule, or the possibilities that will be created by his departure. Inadequate concern for the plight of the people of Iraq and for their future has diminished debate about Iraq here and, even more so, abroad.
Many here and abroad who question the wisdom of going to war nevertheless acknowledge that the Iraqi dictator is among the most oppressive and vicious rulers of our time. A Special Rapporteur for the United Nations Human Rights Commission has described his abuses as "the worst since World War II." For many years Freedom House has rated Saddam Hussein's regime as among "the worst of the worst" violators of political and civil rights, and Human Rights Watch has called for his trial for crimes against humanity. After the Balkan catastrophes, it is widely acknowledged that war criminals should not be granted the immunities traditionally enjoyed by heads of sovereign states.
Many in your Administration are clearly committed to helping establish democracy in Iraq. But some at times have questioned the value of such "nation building," have shown reluctance to make far-reaching international commitments, or have been hesitant about steps that may unsettle traditional allies. So far, your Administration's plans for American political and humanitarian assistance to post-war Iraq leave some significant uncertainties. The budget just passed by Congress includes little money for the substantial reconstruction effort that will almost surely be needed. Nor is it likely that such costs will be paid unless those asked to shoulder them can see that they are fairly shared.
There are those who fear that "regime change" in Iraq may not mean that a new regime will necessarily be a free and democratic one. There are those who fear that once we have satisfied our own security concerns, we will become indifferent to the security needs of those in Iraq and elsewhere in the region who have helped us. You can challenge these doubts and appeal to those who abhor Saddam Hussein by announcing a plan to help establish freedom and democratic self-government in Iraq.
In our view, such a strategy should commit the United States to:
We believe that a significant body of opinion can be persuaded of the view argued by Prime Minister Tony Blair: "Ridding the world of Saddam would be an act of humanity." A clear statement of your plan for supporting democracy and human rights in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East will help us all reach out to those who are open to this truth.
Sincerely,
Bernard Aronson, Former Assistant Secretary of State
The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Ronald Asmus, German Marshall Fund of the United States
Robert Benne, Roanoke College Center for Religion and Democracy
Hyman Bookbinder
J. Budziszewski, Professor, Government and Philosophy, University of Texas at Austin
Bruce Chapman, President, Discovery Institute; Former US Ambassador to the UN
Organizations, Vienna
Richard Cizik, Vice President for Governmental Affairs, National Association of Evangelicals
Joie Delugah, Volunteer Long Term Care Ombudsman, State of California
Thomas R. Donahue
Charles H. Fairbanks, Jr. Director, Central Asia-Caucasus Institute, SAIS, Johns Hopkins University
Mark Falcoff, American Enterprise Institute
John J. Flynn, President, International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, AFL-CIO
David Forte, Professor of Law, Cleveland State University
Hillel Fradkin, President, Ethics and Public Policy Center
Deborah A. Harding
Nat Hentoff, Columnist, Village Voice, Washington Times
Allen Hertzke, Presidential Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Oklahoma
Rachelle Horowitz, Former Political Action Director, American Federation of Teachers
Bruce P. Jackson, President, Program on Transitional Democracies
Robert Kagan, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Max M. Kampelman
Adrian Karatnycky
Penn Kemble, Social Democrats, USA
Irena Kirkland
Diane Knippers, President, Institute on Religion and Democracy
Robert S. Leiken, The Nixon Center
Sarah Lohmann, Fulbright Scholar
Herbert Magidson, Vice President, American Federation of Teachers
Will Marshall, President, Progressive Policy Institute
Paul Marshall, Senior Fellow, Freedom House
Clifford D. May, President, Foundation for the Defense of Democracies
Gerald R. McDermott, Professor of Religion, Roanoke College
Faith McDonnell, Religious Liberty Program Director, Institute on Religion and Democracy
Joshua Muravchik, Resident Scholar, American Enterprise Institute
David Novak, J. Richard and Dorothy Shiff Chair of Jewish Studies, University of Toronto
Michael Novak, George Frederick Jewett Scholar in Religion, Philosophy & Public Policy,
AEI
James Nuechterlein, Editor, First Things
Thomas Oden, Professor of Theology and Ethics, Drew University
Mark Palmer, Former United States Ambassador to Hungary
Martin Peretz, Editor-in-Chief, The New Republic
Juliana Geran Pilon, Institute of World Politics
Diane Ravitch, New York University
Richard Schifter, Former Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights
Nina Shea, Director, Center for Religious Freedom, Freedom House
Fred Siegel, Senior Fellow, Progressive Policy Institute; Professor, Cooper Union for Science & Art
R. Emmett Tyrrell, Editor-in-Chief, American Spectator; Adjunct Fellow, Hudson Institute
Ben Wattenberg, Senior Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
The Very Rev. George L.W. Werner, President, House of Deputies, The Episcopal Church, U.S.A.
Leon Wieseltier, Literary Editor, The New Republic
Jennifer Windsor
Morely Winograd
R. James Woolsey, Former Director of Central Intelligence
List in formation. Affiliations for identification purpose only.
Paul Berman on "Terror and Liberalism" Paul Berman's new book by that title (Norton, 214 pp, $21.00) makes the compelling case that the violent spirits unleashed upon the world from the Middle East are variants of Twentieth Century totalitarianism: something considerably more complex and lethal than a twisted version of Islam or expressions of nationalist grievance. The struggle against this disorder must encompass more than military and police action. It must engage the mind and soul -- as did the struggle against Communism. The reactions to this powerful book from the anti-Americans of the left should be interesting.
Velman Hill on PBS's Rustin Film
Those who enjoyed the recent PBS program " Brother Outsider: The Life of Bayard Rustin" will also enjoy Velma Hill's gentle critique, which appeared in the New York Sun. Velma was, with husband Norm, a founder of the A. Philip Randolph Institute, which Bayard led until the end of his life. She points out that, despite many virtues, the film neglected Bayard's deep association with the labor movement, his commitment to a social-democratic (over a narrowly racial) outlook, and his unwavering support for Israel and those struggling for democracy in the Soviet Union. In some important circles, these stands were hardly fashionable.
Nicaragua: Bob Leiken Exposes Exposers
Bob Leiken's much-awaited book on media coverage of the Nicaraguan conflict will be out soon. ("Why Nicaragua Vanished," Rowman and Littlefield, 263 pp.) Washington Post columnist Robert Kagan calls it "a masterpiece of serious scholarship, sound reasoning and lucid writing." Harvard's Harvey Mansfield says it "will open your eyes to a parade of media stereotypes. Though not an angry book, it will make a reasonable person angry."
Ron Radosh Blacklisted by Hollywood!
Now it's the Hollywood Eleven! Ron Radosh had a cameo appearance in the first cut of Ron Maxwell's Civil War film "Gods and Generals." He's still in the DVD, but not in the version being shown in theatres. He may have been one of the few budding stars cut from this exhaustive Ted Turner spectacle. Could there have been a red diaper baby in the editing room?
Iraq-Al Qaeda Connection Noted
For the anti-totalitarian left, it's a familiar debate: should you join a demonstration that will attract decent and well-meaning citizens, when you know its organizers are untrustworthy and have hidden agendas? This debate divided the non-communist left during the Vietnam War. Today, labor and church groups that oppose U.S. intervention in Iraq are being asked to join demonstrations mounted by organizations that are decidedly strange and unwholesome. There always seems to be someone around who scorns questions about such participation, arguing that what matters is the marchers' message, not who does the grunt work.
One problem, of course, is that the medium often is the message. The extremist organizers of these events know that their presence is meaningful. They exploit it to further the impression that their demonstration is not only challenging a particular policy of the government. They let it be known that they expect the movement to move on to bigger things -- agenda to follow.
Sometimes the organizers of these events carefully omit portions of the message that more mainstream participants would like to convey. For example, many resolutions that unions have adopted criticizing the Bush Administration charge that its focus on Iraq is distracting Americans from the more important struggle against terrorism. But how many signs have you seen at an anti-war demonstration that demand more energetic steps to track down Osama Bin Laden?
In fact, the big worldwide demonstrations at the end of February were put together by network of activists drawn from what the Washington Post's
Glenn Frankel describes as "the ideological left, the anti-globalization movement and peace groups." These groups oppose both the war on terrorism and a war on Iraq. As Frankel notes, the movement's "roots go back to the days just after Sept. 11, 2001, when activists say they began meeting to map out opposition to what they anticipated would be the U.S. military response to the terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon."
Save the Date: May 17 SD Institute
A one-day institute on current affairs for SD members and friends will take place this year on Saturday, May 17th, at the Washington Court Hotel. The program will include such topics as strategic challenges for the American labor movement, the crisis of European social democracy, and prospects for democracy in the Middle East. If you plan to attend, or would like to suggest someone we should invite, please reply to info@socialdemocrats.org.
Notesonline is a monthly electronic bulletin of news and information for the social democratic community. Penn Kemble is the volunteer editor of Notesonline and is responsible for its contents and errors.
To update your own e-mail address, or to be taken off our list, e-mail us at: notes@notesonline.cc. We are eager to add to our list the names and e-mail addresses of individuals who share our outlook and might appreciate this bulletin. Please send them to the e-mail address above. We look forward to hearing from our readers about items that you think deserve mention.
As always, Notesonline is grateful for contributions its readers make to defray our costs. To make a contribution, make your tax-deductible check payable to The League for Industrial Democracy, and mail it to: c/o 1925 K Street, NW, Suite 401, Washington, DC 20006.