HOME / war stories: Military analysis.

Lugar's StemwinderIs the mild-mannered senator a grenade-thrower or a Bush stalking horse?

By Fred KaplanPosted Thursday, June 28, 2007, at 6:17 PM ET

Richard G. Lugar. Click image to expand.Richard Lugar's speech on the Senate floor Monday night was a remarkable critique of President Bush's policy in Iraq—both for what it said (the war is a disaster) and for who said it (the mild-mannered top Republican on the Senate foreign-relations committee).

But the stemwinder—it took him 50 minutes to read it aloud to a near-empty Senate chamber after hours—was also a puzzler. What did it mean? Who was it aimed at? What effect did he wish to pull off? All this is less clear.

The nub of the speech was that Bush's surge is certain to fail. It depends too much "on the actions of others who do not share our agenda"; it tries to achieve goals that military power "cannot achieve"; and it alienates "allies that we will need" to keep the whole Middle East from blowing up.

America's vital interests in the region, he said, are fourfold: preventing Iraq from becoming a terrorist safe haven; preventing sectarian violence from spreading beyond Iraq's borders; preventing Iran from dominating its neighbors; and limiting the loss of U.S. credibility.

Whatever slight improvements the surge may be yielding, Lugar said, they will have no effect on these larger interests.

Bush has been urging Congress to hold off judgment on the surge until the U.S. commander, Gen. David Petraeus, issues his status report this September. But Lugar was, in effect, saying: Forget about the report; it's a sideshow. The policy must change before September—before the U.S. military grows more exhausted, Iraq further crumbles, and the American election season makes serious debate impossible.

But then, a few minutes into the speech, while talking about "viable options" that could still serve our interests, he uttered this intriguing passage:

But seizing these opportunities will require the President to downsize the U.S. military's role in Iraq and place much more emphasis on diplomatic and economic options. It will also require members of Congress to be receptive to overtures by the President to construct a new policy outside the binary choice of surge versus withdrawal. (Italics added.)

Share this article on Digg
Share this article on Buzz

"Overtures by the President"? What overtures by the president? And to "construct" what "new policy" that goes beyond the "choice of surge or withdrawal"?

In the days after the speech, speculation was rife on Capitol Hill, that, far from hurling a rhetorical grenade at Bush's door, Lugar may have been acting as his stalking horse. In this scenario, Bush is ready to offer a compromise on Iraq policy—cutting way back on counterinsurgency (the surge's mission) and returning to counterterrorism, assistance, and training the Iraqi military (missions that require far fewer troops)—but he wants assurances in advance that Congress won't respond with demands for still further cuts.

However, others on the Hill, including some who work closely with Lugar (Republicans and Democrats), dismiss this theory. For one thing, they say, Lugar truly is upset at the Bush administration's manglings and mendacities.

Print This ArticlePRINTEmail to a FriendE-MAILShare This ArticleRECOMMEND...Get Slate RSS FeedsRSS
Fred Kaplan is Slate's "War Stories" columnist and the author of Daydream Believers: How a Few Grand Ideas Wrecked American Power. He can be reached at .
Photograph of Sen. Richard Luger by Mark Wilson/Getty Images.
COMMENTS

Remarks from the Fray:

America's "vital interests" are better translated as: preventing a regional sectarian war that would disrupt oil supplies; preventing Iran from getting a stranglehold on our oil supplies; and pointing out to liberals that, yes, they need Gulf oil as much as conservatives.

A fifth of the world's oil supply comes via the Gulf. Now, perhaps all liberals now drive electric cars or bicycles. But they still buy products that are transported from one place to another in oil-fuelled vehicles. They still travel overseas. They still prefer motorized ambulances to take them to hospital.

Yes, Iraq was "all about oil", but the entire global economy is dependent on this resource. Don't make out that we don't need it, because we do.

--GreenwichJ

(To reply, click here.)

I think Lugar is inviting the president to make proposals to Congress that the president does not want to make. The president wants to stay the course because he still believes in the basic PNAC philosophy that prompted the Iraq invasion in the first place, namely the idea that everyone hungers for the type of government and society we have, and will seize the opportunity if we present it to them. One certain, eternal truth in this philosophy is that we don't have to do nation-building because the Iraqis will insist on doing it themselves. Lugar sees the obvious flaws in the PNAC theory, but the president and his circle of chickenhawk advisors still embrace the whole pathetic, disproven pack of lies.

Lugar probably figures Congress has the power to drag a weak, unpopular, lame duck president in the right direction whether or not the president wants to go that way. If so, it would be the first time anyone ever got the president to listen to good advice that doesn't fit with his ideological preconceptions. I would say Lugar's chances are slim to none, but more power to him for struggling against the odds. His third way tactic is probably right in line with what we should be doing to save Iraq from four years of idiotic American bungling, if anyone even cares about saving Iraq anymore.

--Arlington

(To reply, click here.)

(6/30)

What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES
JFK.TODAY'S PICTURES: JFK.
Cartoonists' take on the auto industry.TODAY'S CARTOONS: Cartoonists' take on the auto industry.
The old ways.TODAY'S DOONESBURY: The old ways.
Washington Post
The Washington Post
OPINIONS
Let the Guy Smoke
Kinsley | Obama probably didn't really give up cigarettes. That's okay.