I believe he did. He is Bob Kerrey, Democrat and former U.S. Senator from Nebraska, who was commenting on President Obama's strategy for Afghanistan and how it might be affected, now that the president has won the Nobel Peace Prize. The Nobel committee might have waited a bit, thinks Mr. Kerrey.
By awarding the prize to Mr. Obama, the Nobel committee also surely
hoped to influence the debate about U.S. policy in Afghanistan. I wish
they had waited until the debate was settled here at home. My wish is
based on a fear that American political leaders are about to talk
themselves into breaking yet another foreign policy commitment.
Mr. Kerrey avoids mention of political parties, but it's almost impossible to miss which "American political leaders" he fears will break foreign policy commitments. It's as if we're about to have a replay of the debate that began in late 2006. That debate was about winning in Iraq. This time it will be about winning in Afghanistan. Does this sound familiar?
No serious leader in Kabul is asking us to leave. Instead we are being
asked to withdraw by American leaders who begin their analysis with the
presumption that victory is not possible. They seem to want to ensure
defeat by leaving at the very moment when our military leader on the
ground has laid out a coherent and compelling strategy for victory.
Mr. Kerrey is taking his own party to task, though he does it without naming names. Note that he doesn't actually say that Democrats were the ones who declared the war in Iraq a lost cause back in 2006 . And though he won't name Democrat names he does mention a name, which makes his sin is so much the greater. He commits the unthinkable by praising George W. Bush.
In December 2006, President George W. Bush was faced with a
similarly difficult foreign policy decision. The Republicans had
suffered tremendous losses in the November election, in part because of
the conduct of the war in Iraq. At the time, the unpopular Republican
president was being pressured by ascendant congressional Democrats and
some members of his own party into withdrawing from Iraq. Failure in
Iraq loomed, as public opinion for the effort to help the
democratically elected government survive had faded thanks to a series
of tactical blunders and inaccurate assessments of what would be needed
to accomplish the mission.
Then, against all reasonable
predictions, President Bush chose to increase rather than decrease our
military commitment. The "surge," as it became known, worked. Victory
was snatched from the jaws of defeat.
Sure, Mr. Kerrey paid lip service to the tactical blunders and inaccurate assessment. But in the end he gives George Bush his due by conceding that he was right. David Petraeus was right. "Reasonable predictions" were wrong. I wonder when reasonable predictions can stop being reasonable. Mr. Kerrey may be loathe to admit it,
but not only were Democrats wrong
about the surge in Iraq, they were wrong about the strategic importance of Iraq.
But at the time they had plenty of political cover. Hawkish sounding Democrats, including Obama lined up against George Bush, urging capitulation, claiming Iraq was a war of choice, a huge mistake, and a distraction from the real and necessary war.
Democrats claimed that they were the real party of national security because they would
fight the war on terror on its real central front. Afghanistan.
And so here we are again, getting ready to listen to those same "American leaders" who, it would now seem, want to change their minds. They're thinking maybe the war in Afghanistan really isn't so necessary after all. They talk about the importance of getting the military strategy right. It's a strategy settled on months ago, but which has now somehow come into question. They look to the opinion polls for guidance.
Great American leaders of our past have ignored popular sentiment
and pressed on during the darkest hours, even when setbacks give
rhetorical ammunition to the skeptics.
President Obama's decision is
extremely difficult. Today, less than 50% of Americans support the war.
No doubt even fewer Americans would be on the side of doing what Gen.
Stanley McChrystal wants to do: temporarily increase the number of
troops and dramatically change our strategy.
Backing General Mchrystal would be a departure for Democrats Recent history has shown they value electoral victory over American military victory, and here they've been given a rare second chance. They may do for Afghanistan what they were unable to do in Iraq. Give it up to the terrorists.
Mr. Kerrey urges President Obama not to give it up. He urges the president to ignore the opinion polls and do what's right.
When it comes to foreign policy, almost nothing matters more then your
friends and your enemies knowing you will keep your word and follow
through on your commitments. This is the real test of presidential
leadership.
George W. Bush ignored popular sentiment and
pressed on with the surge, while reasonable Democrats and their allies in the media presumed the impossibility of success. Mr. Kerrey would like President Obama to follow the example of a great American leader from our past, George W. Bush.