George R. Packard
President, International University of Japan;
Director of the Reischauer Center for East Asian Studies at the School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), Johns Hopkins University, President, U.S.-Japan Foundation
George R. Packard was dean of SAIS from 1979 to 1993 and is now director of the Edwin O. Reischauer Center for East Asian Studies as well as professor of East Asian studies at the school. He is also president of the International University of Japan. From 1965 to 1967, he was chief diplomatic correspondent for Newsweek. Prior to that, he served as special assistant to U.S. Ambassador to Japan Edwin O. Reischauer. In March of 1998, he was appointed president of the U.S.-Japan Foundation.
Packard Report - Dec. 2006
President Bush continues to make stupid, tragic mistakes in his crusade to democratize the Middle East.
Almost everyone in America now understands that the effort to create a stable democracy in Iraq has failed. Everyone, that is, except Bush.
The last best effort to bail him out of this mess gracefully was offered by the bipartisan "Baker-Hamilton Commission." Their report will be formally published on December 6, but the key points have already been leaked to the press.
The Commission will recommend that about half of the 140,000 American troops be withdrawn from Iraq by mid-2008, leaving 70,000 American troops as advisors imbedded in Iraqi units.
This recommendation, endorsed by James Baker, a close friend of the first President Bush, is crafted to give the current President Bush a graceful, no-fault avenue to end what is a nightmare for both Republicans and Democrats alike.
Republicans earnest desire that the war issue should go away before the November 2008 presidential elections. They correctly read the results of the November 2006 mid-term elections as a loud vote of no confidence in the Iraq War policy.
Democrats also want the war to go away, but they do not wish to be accused on "cutting and running."
The American public is asking: why even one more American should die for a cause that is already lost? 2,881 soldiers have died as of this date. More than 21,000 have been wounded.
George W. Bush has once again failed to get the point. Even before
the Baker-Hamilton report goes public, he rejected its main conclusion yesterday: "This business about graceful exit just simply has no realism to it whatsoever." And in Riga two days earlier, he said "There's one thing I'm not going to do: I'm not going to pull the troops off the battlefield before the mission is complete."
Now careful Bush-watchers know that the President can lie and bluff with the best of politicians. Right up to the day he fired Secretary of Defense Rumsfield, he told the American people that he would never do that. Optimists hope that his current tough line is simply cover for what will be a gradual measured draw down of troops.
But the more likely case is that Bush (ever wagamama) still believes that he is hearing the voice of God, and that destiny favors his mission. In this interpretation, he does not care about a Republican victory in 2008, and remains convinced that his mission will succeed. Succumbing to his father's advice (given through James Baker) would be the ultimate humiliation for this insecure son.
Old guard Republican friends of the senior Bush are in a state of shock and despair. They see a White House that is coming apart at the seams. The leak of National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley's memo about Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki means that there is a disloyal leaker close to the power center in the White House. This memo warns that Maliki may not have the "political or security capabilities" to free himself from his narrow militia-dominated political base.
Another recommendation by the Baker-Hamilton group will favor direct talks with Syria and Iran. James Baker has personally met with representatives from both nations, and believes that this route holds promise of a major conference on all the Mid-East issues, including especially the Israeli-Palestinian question. There is some speculation that Baker himself might agree to become a roving ambassador to this end.
But the more Bush denigrates the Commission Report, the less likely it is that Baker will agree to serve. Baker is a consummate realist and he is unlikely to jump to the desk of a sinking ship.
There is one intriguing rumor around that is widely discussed in Washington these days. I doubt that it will happen, but here it is: Bush decides that he must change course in Iraq. Vice President Cheney disagrees violently. Cheney is forced to resign, citing health problems. Bush then nominates Senator John McCain to become Vice President. McCain, a hawk on Iraq, would then presumably have a clear shot at the presidency in 2008. He would easily win Senate confirmation in 2006, while the Republicans still have a majority in the Senate. Thousands more American troops would be sent to Iraq.
Meanwhile, the Israeli influence on the American media is starting to show its opposition to talks with Iran. Israel would like to see American military power used to take out Iranian nuclear facilities that threaten the very existence of Israel. It is widely recognized that the Pentagon is pulling together contingency plans for just such an air attack.
Jewish columnists who favor such an attack warn darkly that if the US fails to confront Iran, Israel will have to mount its own nuclear attack against Iran. This of course would be the start of World War Three. Some observers worry that Bush will agree to this course as part of his messianic mission.
But the majority of Jews in America are far more likely to agree with the editorial today in the New York Times: "The President's advisors need to tell him all the harsh truths about Iraq in the vivid terms they require; they need to tell him how little time he has left to act. This administration has been orchestrating a foreign policy disaster of epic proportions, and history will remember both that the president failed to hear the warning bells and that many others failed to ring them loudly enough."
And this from a newspaper that initially favored the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
- English Version Archive -
2008/
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 | 10 | 11 | 12
2007/ 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 | 11 |
12
2006/ 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 | 8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12
2005/ 1 | 2 |
3 |
4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
2004/ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
9 | 10 |
11 | 12
2003/ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
9 | 10 | 11 |
12
1999/ 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
1998/ 1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 | 7 |
8 |
9 |
10&11 |
12
