National Security: Beyond the Water's Edge

When the political objective is important, clearly defined and understood, when the risks are acceptable, and when the use of force can be effectively combined with diplomatic and economic policies, then clear and unambiguous objectives must be given to the armed forces. Gen. Colin Powell

Politics ends at the water’s edge. September 11th, 2001 defined a sea change in how America perceived the rest of the world. Not since Pearl Harbor had their been a large scale attack on American soil, but even that attack in 1941 happened in an area of the world that was not defined in the American psyche as American at that point. Hawaii of 1941 was perceived as a sleepy American territory used as a naval outpost and a dream vacation for those of means. New York City is the capital of the New World and this terrorist attack was an attack on a symbol that was known to every American. These images were burned into the minds and ire of all Americans, we looked not for explanation and understanding but for revenge and closure.

My mother saw the second tower fall. As a mother she was more concerned about us in Massachusetts than herself in lower Manhattan. This is the nature of parents, I didn't really get it until recently. When I look at my daughter, I wonder about the world she'll grow up in.

I think back to those tragic days of early fall 2001, those couple weeks to month of complete faith in our President to do the right thing. Those months where we struggled to figure out a response. And that response of course was a "no brainer" to attack the training facilities of the 19 that had attempted to bring the most powerful nation of the world to it's knees.

There perhaps has never been a moment in American history outside that bombing of Pearl Harbor where so many Americans were of the same mind and resolve. The use of superbly trained and effective special operations forces supported by air power and the Afghan Northern Alliance among others, made quick work of the Taliban who harbored Bin Laden and al-Qaeda. What happened next is what went wrong.

With the proverbial wind at our back swelled with international support against radical islamic terrorism, we fought the wrong war. Iraq suddenly became the enemy, despite the fact that under Saddam it would be virtually impossible for al-Qaeda to operate. Now don't get me wrong, Saddam was a complete bastard but a cascade of half truths and fear drove us quickly and unprepared into battle.

What was lost was support of our allies, suddenly the French and "old Europe" were celebrated as cowards that did not understand the new world order. Despite the fact that they supported the effort in Afghanistan and certainly would be willing allies in the "war on terror". In the Muslim world and on the "Arab Street" any support for US policy suddenly vanished in the shock and awe.

Playing the "shouldas" and "couldas" is a popular parlor game for many of us but it strikes me odd to think if so many of us in late winter 2003 could have predicted what was to happen in Iraq and the effect of Iraq on the rest of our international policy, why could those with access to the best intelligence and information make such poor decisions and have only excuses to show for it?

Will the President make the decision for a radical turn in foreign policy and international relations by taking a huge mea culpa for the actions of the past four years? Can he treat it as the most expensive mulligan of all time and beg for forgiveness from the rest of the world, blaming it on some sort of dry drunk psychosis?

Hopefully this work towards repairing the stature of the United States in the world will start immediately, the idea of America has always been at least as powerful as our economic and military might. Likely, however it will fall to our next President, and again much of the fate of the world falls into the hands of the American electorate.