Great American War Correspondent
Weighs in. Robert Kaplan pulls way back for some perspective on what the fight in Gaza is about, and counsels the destruction of Iran’s proxy army at the outer edge of the modern Persian empire. Atlantic:
… Gaza constitutes the western edge of Iran’s veritable new empire, cartographically akin to the ancient Persian one, that now stretches all the way to western Afghanistan, where Kabul holds no sway and which is under Iranian economic domination.
Israel’s attack on Gaza is, in effect, an attack on Iran’s empire …
To start with, Hamas does not have to win this war. It can lose and still win … Israel’s dilemma is that it is not fighting a state but an ideology, the postmodern glue that holds together Greater Iran.
…
How do you fight unconventional, sub-state armies empowered by ideas? You undermine them subtly over time, or you crush them utterly, brutally. Israel, unable to tolerate continued rocket attacks on its people, has decided on the latter course. Our own diplomacy with Iran now rests on whether or not Israel succeeds. We need to create leverage before we can negotiate with the clerical regime, and that leverage can only come from an Israeli moral victory—one that leaves Hamas sufficiently reeling to scare even the pro-Iranian Syrians from coming to its aid. In defense of its own territorial integrity, Israel has, in effect, launched the war on the Iranian empire that President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, in particular, can only have contemplated.
… now that Israel has launched a war, we need it to succeed, rather than be compromised by the kind of ceasefire that allows Hamas to regroup. If that happens, our leverage with Iran will be further reduced, with negotiations yielding little. But once Israel does succeed, then we will need to bear down on it hard, in the service of negotiations with both Arabs and Iranians. If he is smart, President-elect Barack Obama will now be quietly rooting for Israel.
You’ll want to read the whole thing. Personally, I think Obama needs to do more than quietly root for Israel. He needs to plan out his ongoing assault on the Persian empire. To include a full range of measures across its sphere of influence, including pressure on the Russians who aid and abet it, pressure on Syria, pressure on Iran’s proxies and allies in Iraq, pressure on the skittish Gulfis and Saudis, and pressure in Afghanistan, and support for all those who choose the right side. The mullahs also need to be aware that he is willing to blow their nuke facilities to bits, or maybe will and won’t object if his Israeli pals do that for him. He can do all of this with a big Kumbayah smile on his face, but he needs to do it.
The point on which I’d dicker with Kaplan is where he references, without actually using the phrase, the Arab street. I think Arabs high and low, while they might cheer on the terrorists when the Israelis start shooting, have had it with Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and Syria, and as George Bush demonstrated, can be encouraged to do the right thing. I’m not convinced a Fatah takeover of Gaza would render Fatah an Israeli stooge. The Palestinians who already think that will think that. But if managed properly … here’s where Obama and his boss, Hillary Clinton, come in … it will be a pan-Arab project of Arab nations trying to see to their people’s interest and behave like modern nations, at longlast.
Kaplan, by the way, is a towering, not fully appreciated figure in American war correspondence. Knows which side he’s on and isn’t afraid to be on it. Has been in the streets, door to door with the grunts … with the mujahideen for that matter going back to when they were our proxy army in Afghanistan … can tell you more about what the United States military actually does in this world than just about anyone who is not actually in the heart of the Black World, and possesses tremendous clarity of thought that allows him to pull back for a bigger picture than most of our pols and scholars are able to focus on. Not everyone can manage what he has, but the tragedy of modern war reportage in these difficult times is that more people in this crappy business don’t share Kaplan’s fundamental ethos and worldview … which is to say, they don’t even know what the sides are, let alone which side they are on.
A quick Kaplan reader:
Five Days in Fallujah, embedded with Marines in the aborted First Fallujah. You may remember this part:
It was sometimes hard to imagine anyone more serious and intense than Captain Jason Smith. Yet there was a courtly quality about him too. I thought of a Confederate officer. Through his Iraqi interpreter Smith told the man, “Sir, we are truly sorry that we had to ask your family to leave the building. You can all go back in now. We will compensate you for the inconvenience. We are United States Marines, a different breed than you are used to. We do not take kindly to people shooting at us. If you have any information about the Ali Babas, please share it with us. If you know any of the Ali Babas personally, please tell them to attack us as quickly as possible, so that we may kill them and start repairing sewers, electricity, and other services in your city.”
Atlantic interview with Kaplan re First Fallujah and other reporting experiences. Atlantic’s Kaplan index here.
Your Kaplan bookshelf:
The Coming Anarchy: Shattering the Dreams of the Post Cold War
Eastward to Tartary: Travels in the Balkans, the Middle East, and the Caucasus
Balkan Ghosts: A Journey Through History
Soldiers of God: With Islamic Warriors in Afghanistan and Pakistan … from back in the day.
Warrior Politics: Why Leadership Demands a Pagan Ethos … that looks interesting. But the Publisher’s Weekly review doesn’t talk about Thor or Mars at all …
Years of reporting from combat zones in Bosnia, Uganda, the Sudan, Sierra Leone, Pakistan, Ethiopia and Eritrea have convinced Kaplan (Balkan Ghosts, The Coming Anarchy) that Thucydides and Sun-Tzu are still right on the money when they wrote that war is not an aberration and that civilization can repress barbarism but cannot eradicate it. Reminding readers that “The greater the disregard of history, the greater the delusions regarding the future,” Kaplan conducts a brisk tour through the works of Machiavelli, Malthus and Hobbes, among others, to support his advocacy of foreign policy based on the morality of results rather than good intentions. From those classics, he extracts historical models and rationales for exploiting military might, stealth, cunning and what he dubs “anxious foresight” (which some may regard as pessimism based on disasters past) in order to lead, fight and bring adversaries to their knees should they challenge the prevailing balance of power. He also adapts this model to business, exploring the ways modern-day CEOs can benefit from history’s lessons. Kaplan’s discussion of the world’s breeding grounds for rogue warriors out to disrupt daily life in bizarre new ways will strike a chord with most readers, as will his recounting of the brilliant statesmanship of Churchill and Roosevelt during World War II. Some readers, however, may take exception to the potshots Kaplan aims at (unnamed) media personalities and human rights advocates. This is a provocative, smart and polemical work that will stimulate lively discussion. Agents, Brandt and Brandt. (Jan.)Forecast: Kaplan’s credentials, combined with his call for a strong and unambiguous foreign policy, should draw attention. Blurbs from Henry Kissinger and former Secretary of Defense William J. Perry will help.
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 8:57 am on Tuesday, January 6, 2009
4 Responses to “Great American War Correspondent”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
January 6th, 2009 at 10:18 am
Great piece, thanks for introducing me to Kaplan. (So maybe I don’t always pay attention…. )
I certainly agree with you about the actions Obama should take, and I have some glimmers of hope about how things are unfolding. While most of the press is mindlessly flogging the usual memes, it does seem like Iran and its proxies have less support from the Arab states than ever before. Egypt’s public statements have been rather encouraging. The balance of power in the Middle East does seem to be slowly changing in the right direction (by which of course I mean away from tyranny and toward Western freedoms). I may be the last person on earth to consider the Bush Doctrine alive and well, but it sure looks like it’s working, to me.
Thank you so much for your coverage of the Israeli front of the war, Jules. You are doing such a great job of providing a useful and often uplifting mix of news, opinion, and background.
I’m hitting the tip jar yet again. All y’all out there reading Jules for free, consider how much value you are getting and hit that PayPal button if you can!
January 6th, 2009 at 11:21 am
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the - Web Reconnaissance for 01/06/2009 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.
January 6th, 2009 at 7:24 pm
Indeed, Great Article. Israel needs to win this war, or they better never initiated the attack. Hamas terror group is not liked by other terror groups and quite feared. This is the time regardless, what the liberal media is reporting, Israel keeping killing as many Hamas thugs and completely wipe them out. War is not pretty, and if you start a fight, better go for the victory over you enemy, this is the rule in the middle east. Iran at this point, as a nation is suffering from inflation, cares less what is Israel doing to Hamas or Palestinians! They are more concerned about availability of food and their government is not delivering their basic needs.. This is the Best if time for Israel to achieve its goal and secure its boarders. I just hope and pray one more time please finish the job and do not pull back, it is a great opportunity for victory over their enemy.
January 7th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
I think Israel should publicly and repeatedly claim it is ready for Peace.
As soon as the Palestinian elected Hamas leaders agree to a Peace Treaty with Israel that recognizes Israeli borders and agrees that there will be no rocket, morter, or other attacks on Israel from the Palestinian state.
When any specific leader suggests a ‘cease fire’ to negotiate, Israel should reply that they’ve tried that idea and it has failed. Many times. The new idea is to keep fighting and killing Hamas killers until Hamas and the Palestinians accept a Peace Treaty.
Perhaps they should also suggest open, public negotiations with any who desire peace — and videotape them. They should be requesting PeaceKeeping forces from the countries whose leaders suggest a cease fire, and make any future cease fire partially dependent on their agreement to provide peacekeepers, whose role will include stopping the launching of rockets against Israel.