Rummy Versus The Commies

Rumsfeld yesterday wrote Iraq and the War on Terror into a framework where it has no meaningful place: the Cold War. In fact, the War on Terror does has a relationship to the Cold War, but it's not the one Rumsfeld intends to invoke. The GWoT has a logistical lineage that stems from the Cold War, it's like a causal relationship, but more a historical one. However, the GWoT is not part of the Cold War, it does not equal the Cold War, and its detractors are nothing like those doubters from the Cold War:

Of course, some are arguing that the effort in Iraq is doomed. Recently we've again been told that Iraq may prove worse than Vietnam, and it's been alleged that we're not winning.

It's worth noting that the enemy does not appear to share that view. On the contrary, terrorists like Zarqawi are indicating concern about the lack of support from the Iraqi people, and the reasons are clear. They are -- the terrorists, the insurgents, are not a nationalist movement with a strong popular support. They have lost their safe havens in Iraq. Their most prominent leaders are not Iraqis, they're not Ho Chi Minhs with a nationalist base, but, in the case of Zarqawi, a Jordanian murderer. And their massacres of innocents have outraged most Iraqis rather than attracting broad support. Indeed, polls indicate that the anger against the terrorists and the insurgents is growing.

I'm reminded that a few weeks after Operation Enduring Freedom began in Afghanistan, a news story suggested that the U.S. was already in a quagmire. But it was several weeks later, only, that Kabul actually fell to the Northern Alliance and our forces. Throughout history there have always been those who predict America's failure just around every corner. At the height of World War II, a prominent U.S. diplomat predicted that democracy was finished in Britain and probably in America too. Many Western intellectuals praised Stalin during that period. For a time, Communism was very much in vogue. It was called Euro-Communism to try to mute or mask the totalitarian core. And thankfully, the American people are better centered. They ultimately come to the right decisions on big issues. And the future of Iraq is a very big issue. So those being tossed about by the winds of concern should recall that Americans are a tough lot and will see their commitments through.

Rumsfeld wants to ratchet the GWoT as part of an extended Cold War era effort. Something that is sustained and undefined, amourphous and unapproachable by most, but feared by all.

But the disconnect is here: the war in Iraq has proven itself to be not part of the War on Terror by virtue of neccessity. In fact, Iraq is only related to the GWoT because it fuels the causes of Terrorists at this point, and because it has distracted from the completion of the war on terror against the terrorist networks, fractured those networks, and made the entire thing one gigantic mess.

His comment that "Euro-Communism" was seeking to simply "mask the totalitarian core" may or may not be accurate. But it is equally clear that slamming the term Communism in any way; Invading an unrelated country for the purpose of the War on Terror; and embarking on any number of bizarre justifications for these issues is an equal attempt at masking the totalitarian core. Only this one is here, in Washington.