Foreign Policy USA

HAVE THE HAWKS BEEN CAGED? The Neo-Conservatives appears to have been driven out of the Whitehouse but are they really gone? When president Bush delivered the verdict the following morning after the US mid –term elections; describing it as a “thumping defeat” one immediately had the inclination that a lot of changes in Washington were in the offing. The Ideological battle for the control of American foreign policy (at least for next two years) had reached a decisive point and the election was the critical decider. Whether the Bush administration would continue to be dominated by the Neo Conservatives (Neocons) or shifted toward the Realists view was the key question that was begging for an answer. And true to predictions, the last real bulwark of the Neocons, Donald Rumsfeild the Defense Secretary was shown the exit…well he resigned but it was clear that he infact was pushed instead of jumping. A few hours later Mr. John Bolton, the US representative to the United Nations who was himself smuggled into that position after evading Congressional hearing also resigned. This was clearly done to avoid having to face the now Democrat controlled congress with a high possibility of suffering a humiliating rejection. For a man who had famously declared his disdain and contempt for multilateralism and international institutions, he clearly would be far from missed in UN circles. So with such influential Neocons gone, can one safely say the “Hawks”(as they are collectively known because of their tendency for hardliner and confrontational attitude to disagreement ) have been consigned to a strong room and locked away for at least the rest of Mr. Bush’s second term? Before that question could be attempted it will be worth considering the immediate events that led to the mid-term ‘thumping’ and the subsequent loss of favour of the Neocons. The clouds had been gathering and all the warning signs were clear since the insurgency in Iraq gathered steam and a lot begun to go wrong with the occupation. After the glorious victory in Iraq in mid 2003 the Neocons with their hawkish strategists committed a lot of blunders that came back to haunt them. A lot of issues came together to change the ideological outlook of Washington and rescue American foreign policy from the Neocons. One of such issues was the continuing and unabated disaster in Iraq which had left a bitter disappointment to most Republican and even some of the hard core Neocons. The abject failure in Iraq as well as the increasing death toll of American soldiers was proving a hard pill to swallow. Having failed to effect change from the inside, some the Neocons who did not like the Iraq strategy decided to fight the system from the outside. Many of them launched stinging attacks against the administration especially personalities like Donald Rumsfeild and Dick Cheney. A lot of them called for the sacking of Mr. Rumsfeild and a drastic change in direction at the Pentagon. One of such disillusioned Neocons was David Frum, the former speech writer for Bush who is credited for coining the phrase “Axis of Evil”. In November 2006 he granted an interview to Vanity Fair in which he fiercely criticized the strategy in Iraq, questioned the leadership of Mr. Bush and called for the sacking of the Defense Secretary. Also in the same Vanity fair magazine Richard “the Prince of Darkness” Perle of the American Enterprise Institute as well as Kenneth Adelman, a former member of the Defense Policy Board at the Pentagon who famously declared in 2003 that the Invasion of Iraq would be ‘cakewalk’; heavily criticized the handling of the war and reiterated the call for the sacking of the Defense Secretary. Coming from such visible and powerful Neocons it surely was a worrying development. These men were the real brains behind the invasion in the first place so such an abrupt about turn was really a barometer on how bad matters had gotten. Matters really got out of hand when on November 4 2006, The Army Times, The Marine Times and The Navy Times published a joint editorial calling for Mr. Rumsfield to go. These publications were the mouthpieces of the various US army units (Army, Marine, and Navy) and as is the time honored tradition in the US, the military takes orders from administrators but this time the Army was calling for the sacking of their administrative head. This was unheard of! But it happened. Then there was the resultant plunge in the popularity of the Administration and their Policies. The slim public support that was showed before and during the war has even grown even more thinly. The president himself has had to watch his approval rating whittled down to historical lows. One such rating conducted by Harris, and released just before the mid-term elections in November showed that his approval among even Republicans was very low. As a matter of fact Mr. Bush’s approval rating was found to worse than what former president Nixon enjoyed during the Watergate Scandal! Having listened to the council of the Neocons which had proved to be disastrous for both the war effort and his image, he did not need a lot persuading to start reevaluating his options. Probably one of the most significant events that triggered the change in direction in the Oval Office was the wide public acceptance of the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group even before their recommendations were published. It was not a hard sell at all as the only effort it had to put in was to convince Americans their plan did not include any of cardinal strategies of the failing Neocons plan. Even the make up of the bi-partisan group was enough to extract public approval and support. Led by James Baker, a former Secretary of State (a leading realist) and consisting of some of the most experienced politicians in the US credibility was not hard to command. Even though subsequent events has seen their ‘radical’ suggestions ignored by Mr. Bush in announcing and increase in troops in Iraq and also flatly refusing to engage Syria and Iran in any diplomatically on the way forward in Iraq, it is clear that the current strategy (which is actually no different from previous only) is not informed by the Neocons and will certainly not be run by them. It is also clear that the members of the Neocons camp is not singing from the same hymn book. .There has been sharp divisions among them over other issues which used to unite them. One of such issues is the way forward in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and how to deal with Iran over its nuclear ambitions. Some of the Hawks themselves seem to have lost their Neo conservative zeal and have begun to questions whether their ideology is relevant in today’s reality. In the same Vanity Fair interview Richard Perle said that on hindsight the invasion of Iraq was a mistake and that if the question was asked of him today he would advice against it. Such a frank admission from the intellectual linchpin of the Neocons camp is such a significant pointer to the level confidence in the camp. Also Kenneth Adelman also speaks of the plan to invade Iraq as one he would mark “CANT DO” and file away given the benefit of hindsight. For a man who declared that attacking Iraq and getting rid of Saddam Hussein would be ‘cakewalk’ it is a shocking revelation. The Neocons have become an endangered species in the White House as a series of scandals and failures have seen many of them exit from the administration even before the ignominy in Iraq made them unpopular in the public perception. The co heads of the Hawks cabal have all but disappeared from the administration with the departure of Neocons heavyweights such as Douglas Feith, former Undersecretary for Defense Policy and Lewis Libby, the former Chief of Staff for Vice President Cheney. Paul Wolferwitz was shipped to the World Bank to pursue the economic schema of the Neocons strategy for world domination. It has not gone exactly according to plan as the new policy culture that has swept through the organization’s bureaucracy has dwarfed his influence. In fact his view of the world has been moderated over the last two years he has been the president of the World Bank. The former Undersecretary of Defense, John Bolton was also sent to the United Nations. John Bolton’s years at the UN which came to an end recently saw America become more unilateralist as was captured in the last Speech by the former UN secretary General Kofi Annan delivered at the Truman Institute in December last year. One of the heaviest blows to the Neocons camp was the forced resignation of Karl Rove for his involvement in the leak of the name of a CIA undercover agent. His departure was a big loss to most republicans who believed that his role in the in the campaign delivered the 2004 presidential elections for Bush. He became so powerful in the Whitehouse that he was referred to as “the brain of Mr. Bush” and a major asset to the Neocons. Not even the Neocons in Congress were spared as a major figure like Tom Delay, the leader of Republicans in Congress, was forced to resign for his part in campaign finance shenanigans. So with such serious setbacks to the hawks can it be concluded that their time in the corridors of power in is over? It could be argued tersely that one of the Neocons henchmen, the vice President Dick Cheney, is a survivor and could still have influence that could tip the balance of power back in Neocons territory. However the chances of that happening are slim since the conduits for his ideas in the form the former Defense Secretary have been cut out. He is now lone and marginalized figure in the Whitehouse and even struggle for visibility. His cataclysmic fall out of favour has been swift and the best he can hope for is to become a lame duck for the next two years. This is such a contrast from the glory days of his power and influence when he was the most powerful personality in the Oval office and the fulcrum of the Neocons of the ideological camp. Having pulled all the significant strings in the Bush’s administration during the first term and first two years of the second as well as pushing out figures with more realist and moderate world vision such as Colin Powel, the former Secretary of State, Mr. Cheney dominated the American Foreign policy scene. Since the turbulent aftermath of the mid –term elections, a lot seemed to have settled and there is a gradual shift in foreign policy which is a bit different from the previous one primarily informed by Neocons doctrine. It started with changes in personnel at key positions to drive the new strategy. The new Secretary of Defense; Robert Gates is a good bet for a change in strategy in Iraq which is now in shambles. As a former chief of the CIA he is expected to bring more realistic tactics not only in Iraq but in Afghanistan as well. The movement of John Negroponte from his current position to the State Department as Deputy Secretary of State is expected to boost diplomacy and more multilateralism which were reviled by the Neocons. As a former US representative to the UN he comes with more experience and realistic outlook on foreign policy and however hawkish it is, it would be much better than whatever the world had to deal with the Neocons in control. Also the appointment of the current US Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalizad to the UN to replace John Bolton is a shift in direction which can only be good news for the world and America as well. The disappointment over the refusal of Mr. Bush to go along with the recommendations of the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group has dampened the hopes of many in the Realist camp especially the refusal to engage Iran and Syria in an attempt to find a durable solution in Iraq, but it is clear that the Hawks have lost both physical and ideological presence in Washington.