Tom Friedman, appearing on “Charlie Rose” August 16, downplayed prospects for the surge working, saying it’s just “too late.” Friedman stuck by his position, articulated for the first time a year ago, that we “can’t throw more good lives after good lives.” He wants to set a date certain for withdrawal (thought he would leave forces in Kurdistan and along the border in some areas).Friedman, defended, in response to Rose’s probing, his earlier support of going into Iraq, saying he makes no apology for hope, apologizing only for ranking hope above the knowledge he did have that putting Iraq together after Saddam would be hellishly difficult. Oddly, Friedman added he doesn’t take back anything he wrote. Odd, because one thing commentators can count on is publishing lots of stuff that will come back to bite them.
On the surface, Friedman has given up on Iraq. Yet he hasn’t, really. He laid out a plan for Iraq’s having a future: 1) establish a monopoly of force; 2) build on the success of Kurdistan, and; 3) wait out a resolution of the Kurdish, Sunni, and Shia divisions, something, one imagines, that might take decades. Like the more famous Middle East problem.
No comments:
Post a Comment