A Report Card: A Grading of President Bush based on
"Dear Mr. President, Here's How to...Make Sense of Your Second Term,
Secure Your Legacy, and, oh yeah, Create a Future Worth Living"
The above mentioned article by Dr. Thomas P.M. Barnett appeared in the February
2005 Esquire. While Esquire may not be your foreign policy magazine of
choice, Dr. Barnett is for real. He is a clear headed, realpolitik, economic
determinist with a neo-Wilsonian bent whose ideas have influenced many of the
recent changes in the American military. He is best known for his killer
PowerPoint shows and as the author of The
Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century. Shortly after publishing this article, Barnett and the Naval War College parted ways. I found his
prescription for Bush's (and our nation's) success very perceptive, if
occasionally snarky. After a mere six months (a lifetime in the second term of a
president), how is Bush doing by Dr. Barnett's standards?
Barnett lays down three keys: "Co-opt Iran, lock in China, and take down
North Korea." Let the grading begin.
Bush Goes to Tehran
As Nixon went to China, Barnett asks Bush to achieve rapprochement with Iran.
The Mullahs have proven economic failures and can't last long if properly
handled. The deal he proposes is "You can have the bomb, and we'll take you
off the Axis of Evil list, plus we'll re-establish diplomatic ties and open up
trade. But in exchange, not only will you bail us out on Iraq first and foremost
by ending your support of the insurgency, you'll also cut off your sponsorship
of Hezbollah and other anti-Israeli terrorist groups, help us bully Syria out of
Lebanon, finally recognize Israel, and join us in guaranteeing the deal on a
permanent Palestinian state. You want to be recognized as the regional player of
note. We're prepared to do that. But that's the price tag. Pay it now or get
ready to rumble."
In the event, Bush has blustered and threatened Iran, pointedly saying
"All options are on the table." Barnett warns against such saber
rattling, noting that any military option would be a disaster even if militarily
successful. Our trade with Iran remains limited to oil, which builds no close
contacts or the social and economic freedom that can follow true integration
into the world economy. Since the US offers only scolding and sticks, Iran is
only too happy to assist the resistance to the American occupation of Iraq.
Hezbollah remains strong, though the Syrians have mainly left Lebanon. It is
likely that this is a byproduct of the "big bang" of the invasion of
Iraq, but it was not because Iran wanted it to happen. Iran will recognize
Israel when pigs fly and are made the national symbol of both countries. We have
not recognized Iran as a major regional player, but they are one anyway and it
has strengthened the hands of the religious conservatives there. Well, at least
he hasn't invaded them. GRADE: D
Lock in China at Today's Prices
China is exploring the concept of "Peaceful Rising," as opposed to
the relatively unpeaceful rising of the United States and the absolutely
unpeaceful rising of Germany and Japan. Barnett suggests we do all we can to
encourage them. "Take America's defense guarantee to Taiwan off the table
and do it now, before some irrational politician in Taipei decides he's ready to
start a war between two nuclear powers....Let's lock in a strategic alliance
with rising China at today's prices, because it's got nowhere to go but up over
the coming years." This is a tough sell, since both countries' militaries
are eager for a near peer competitor to justify spending programs.
As Barnett himself has pointed on his blog. the Bush administration is
pursuing dual tracks (the economic separate from the military/political). As the
Chinese do not see a separation, all they see is inconsistency and confusion.
Irrational politicians in Taipei remain eager for provocation. By leaving the
threat of nuclear war on the table, Bush risks having America's options
determined by local Taiwanese politics. To his credit, he has not totally
alienated the Chinese. Success is still possible; he just has not taken any
action to make it likely. Since Barnett calls for buying in at today's prices,
this lack of action does not score well. GRADE: C-
Kill Kim: Volumes 1, 2 & 3
The solution to North Korea is easy; "make Kim an offer he can't
refuse." Since Team America is unavailable, Barnett proposes a coalition of
China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand, plus Russia. All have
reason to want Kim gone. All could be brought together to make it clear to Kim
that an honorable retirement is preferable to what will happen to Saddam or what
did happen to his sons.
Unfortunately for Bush's grade, this is the second half of a two-part
question. The U.S. needs China to take Kim down. Without Chinese agreement,
anything more than threats, talk and more scolding are out of the question. Kim
is secure because he has WMD and we only invade countries that we know don't
have them. He continues to export drugs, counterfeit currency and weapons with
no consequences to himself. His countrymen starve, but he will resist us to his
last gulag serf. There is every expectation that Kim will rule North Korea when
Bush is a former president. GRADE: D
Iraq: The Elephant in the Room
It is interesting that Dr. Barnett did not list Iraq as a make or break issue
for Bush. Barnett sees the invasion of Iraq through the optimistic lens evident
in his work . Like most Americans, he was confident that the invasion would
bring better days to Iraq. Better days for Barnett primarily mean better
economic conditions, more trade, more connection to the world economy. Flows of
people, foreign direct investment and energy are the metrics. The rise of
political freedom usually follows, not precedes these, with China and the New
Core countries as exemplars..
Almost every point in The
Pentagon's New Map concerning the importance of the follow-on force to
winning to peace was ignore by the Bush administration. Far from being the
"source code" for the administration, Barnett's work stands in sharp
contrast to what Bush has wrought. Foreign direct investment was actively
discouraged post-invasion, with the spoils of war being limited to American
companies. Little thought was given to providing security, the sine non qua of
economic development. Rumsfeld gloried in winning the war with a small takedown
force while distaining the need for enough troops to prevent the chaos that led
to the insurgency. Basic economic and military rulesets were ignored at great
cost. Grading the invasion and occupation of Iraq by the standards of Dr.
Barnett's books is beyond the scope of this article. It is true that America has
had the opportunity to learn many valuable lessons, much as a team that loses
its first game of the year, but there are no firm indications that the proper
lessons have been learned or that they will be implemented by those at the top.