First Published: 2017-05-15

The Glorious Return of Condi Rice
The failure to impose meaningful accountability on the Iraq Wars architects allows them to return as wise advisers to be consulted by media outlets and todays politicians, as with Condoleezza Rice, notes James W Carden.
Middle East Online

Condoleezza Rice, the National Security Adviser at the time of the Iraq invasion and then President George W. Bushs Secretary of State, has returned to the public eye, out promoting her new book, entitledDemocracy: Stories from the Long Road to Freedom.

National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State Colin Powell, and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld listen to President George W. Bush speak about the Middle East on June 24, 2002. (Photo from Whitehouse.gov)

In late March, Rice met at the White House with President Donald J. Trump, who she previously had said should not be president. Rices return to the public eye would seem to prove the truth of Professor Stephen Walts axiom thatbeing a neocon means never having to say your sorry.

It seems like a lifetime ago, but there was a time when Rices star was ascendant. AnAugust 1999 profile of RiceinNational Reviewdubbed Rice as George Bushs foreign policy czarina and described her in rapturous terms. Rice, according to theNRsJay Nordlinger, was the very picture of American overachievement; If she becomes secretary of state or even something lesser, she will be big. Rock-star big; She is, all agree, an immensely appealing person: poised, gracious, humbly smart; Her television appearances have prompted marriage proposals; And she is very much a jock.

Nordlinger was also of the opinion that Rice was on the cusp of becoming A major cultural figure, adorning the bedroom walls of innumerable kids and the covers of innumerable magazines.

But it was not to be. By the end of the Bush years, Ricesreputation lay largely in tatters. There was a time when,New York TimescorrespondentHelene Cooper wrotein September 2007, perhaps more than Hillary Rodham Clinton or Barack Obama, Condoleezza Rice seemed to have the best shot at becoming the first woman or the first African-American to be president.

Accounts of the early Bush years, particularly following 9/11, showed that Rice was an incompetent manager of the National Security Council process, unable or unwilling to withstand the onslaught of wondrously reckless and short-sighted advice provided by Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz.

Seeking Redemption

Rices new book would seem to be (yet another) shot at redemption. (Rice had previously toured the country in support of her memoir,No Higher Honor: A Memoir of My Years in Washington.)

Ex-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice

Writing in theNew York Times, Walter Russell Meade, the editor of the neoconservativeAmerican Interest, called RicesDemocracyan important new book.

Her faith in the benefits and strategic importance of democracy promotion, writes Meade is as strong as, or stronger than, it was when she joined the George W. Bush administration in 2001. Meade, a sympathetic reviewer who shares many of Rices assumptions about the beneficent power of the U.S. military, approvingly observes that her new book is an attempt to hammer home the idea of democracy promotion as a key goal for American foreign policy.

A child of segregated Alabama, Rice says that her foreign policy views are shaped by the ideals that animated the American civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. For Rice, U.S. foreign policy should be a continuation that movement, i.e., the U.S. should use its power to advance aglobalstruggle for human and civil rights. Its an idea that has intuitive appeal, yet when put into practice, the results have been little short of disastrous.

A Devastating Death Toll

The period of the last 18 years from NATOs ill-conceived intervention on behalf of Kosovar Muslims in Serbia in 1999 through to the present day has been marked by an optimistic and at times unshakable faith on the part of the American political establishment in its duty and right to intervene in foreign civil conflicts under democratic or humanitarian pretexts.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair and U.S. President George W. Bush shake hands after a joint White House press conference on Nov. 12, 2004. (White House photo)

The intellectual framework for this golden age of intervention was set forth not by an American, but by a young, dynamic British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, during the course of NATOs bombing of Serbia in 1999. In April of that year, Blair traveled to Chicago andattempted to justifythe war on humanitarian grounds. In some ways, Blairs speech heralded the era of humanitarian intervention and global democracy promotion in which we still find ourselves.

Blair declared that We are all internationalists now, whether we like it or not. We cannot turn our backs on conflicts and the violation of human rights within other countries if we want still to be secure. The Prime Minister continued, stating his belief that if we can establish and spread the values of liberty, the rule of law, human rights and an open society then that is in our national interests too.

Initially, Rice was slow to sign on to such a transformational project; after all, according to the author James Mann, Rice had risen to prominence as heir to the foreign policy traditions of Henry Kissinger and Brent Scowcroft. At Stanford and during the first Bush administration, she had been an avowed proponent of the doctrine of realism.

In an essay entitled Promoting the National Interest inForeign Affairsin January 2000, Rice wrote presciently that an overly broad definition of Americas national interest is bound to backfire. As late as 2002, her Stanford colleague and fellow Russia specialist Michael McFaul (who served as Ambassador to Russia under President Obama) said of Rice, She believes in realpolitik, that the main driving force of international relations is balance of power politics and that what happens internally [sic] inside a country should not be part of foreign policy.

Creeping Neoconservatism

Yet even before 9/11 and the emergence of George W. Bushs Freedom Agenda, Rice had slowly been inching away from the realism of her mentor Scowcroft towards a conception of international affairs not markedly different from that of Tony Blair or the neoconservatives like William Kristol who once distrusted her.

At the start of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, President George W. Bush ordered the U.S. military to conduct a devastating aerial assault on Baghdad, known as shock and awe.

It was during the period between 9/11 and commencement of the Iraq war that Rices transformation from realist to a kind of soft neoconservative became complete. Thereafter, she became, like Bush, Blair, Hillary Clinton and Samantha Power, an emblematic figure of the age of intervention.

By mid-2003, Rice had become a true believer. In a speech in London that June,Rice askedWhy would anyone who shares the values of freedom seek to put a check on those values? Democratic institutions themselves are a check on the excesses of power. Power in the service of freedom, said Rice, is to be welcomed.

A valedictory piece inForeign Affairs in July 2008, showed what a long way she traveled in eight years, from warning, on the eve of Bushs presidency, that an overly broad definition of Americas national interest is bound to backfire to now expressing her belief that cooperation with our democratic allies should not be judged simply by how we relate to one another. It should be judged by the work we do together to defeat terrorism and extremism, meet global challenges, defend human rights and dignity, and support new democracies.

For Rice, Democratic state-building is now an urgent component of our national interest. Indeed, it is Americas job to change the world, and in its own image.

Today, when Rice talks about Iraq, or foreign policy in general, asshe did recently with NPRs Rachel Martin, she is given a respectful hearing. Apparently it would be a breach of decorum or the rules of the game to ask Rice whether she was concerned, embarrassed (or aware) that the Bush administrations invasion of Iraq was ultimately responsible for the rise of ISIS.

Unchallenged, Rice is allowed to paint the war and its aftermath in the most anodyne of terms. Today, according to Rice, Iraq has a legislature that tries to function. It has a prime minister who is accountable. They have a very free and functioning press. In her telling, Iraq is in many waysbetternow because its not an authoritarian state any longer, and its not a totalitarian state in the way that it was under Saddam Hussein.

And in perhaps the most astoundingly obtuse statement since Gary Johnsons whats an Aleppo? Rice told the apparently somnolent Martin that Its very different to be Iraqi today than to be Syrian. Tell that to the residents of Mosul, the Iraqi city that was overrun by Islamic State extremists in 2014 and is now the scene of a bloody assault by Iraqi forces backed by U.S. and allied airstrikes.

The point here is that Rice shouldnt be let off the hook so easily; after all, the costs of Bushs Middle East adventures have been staggering. Ten years after the 2003 invasion,Brown Universitys Cost of Warproject estimated that the war had killed roughly 190,000 people and cost $2.2 trillion. By 2016, the costs of the combined military actions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan had grown. According to the latest figures from the project:

Over 370,000 people have died due to direct war violence,and at least 800,000 more indirectly

200,000 civilians have been killed as a result of the fighting at the hands of all parties to the conflict

10.1million the number of war refugees and displaced persons

The US federal price tag for the Iraq war is about 4.8trillion dollars

Excusing Wars of Supremacy

Through the years from her time as a NSC staffer for Bush the Elder, through her disastrous tenure as NSC adviser (followed by a marginally less-bad tenure as Secretary of State) during the administration of Bush the Lesser Rice has developed what I have called a soft-neoconservatism which attempts to disguise and excuse the American will to global supremacy by camouflaging it in the soft language of human rights.

Her approach to global affairs marries a credulous belief in the power of democracy promotion with a belief in the efficacy of U.S. military power. Rices embrace of democracy promotion is no doubt wholehearted and genuine. But it is all the more troubling and dangerous because of it.

One wonders: is there really any difference between the vacuous, happy pieties of soft-neoconservatism of which Rice, Hillary Clinton and Madeleine Albright are such ardent adepts, or the hard neoconservatism of Beltway Caesars like Sen. Tom Cotton, Robert Kagan and Elliot Abrams, or the outright militarism of the current crop of Trump appointees like Defense Secretary James Mattis and NSC adviser H.R. McMaster?

An equally urgent question as concerns Rice in particular and the Bush crowd generally: why have they suffered no serious consequences for the disastrous decisions that were made on their watch?

James W Carden is a contributing writer for The Nation and editor of The American Committee for East-West Accords eastwestaccord.com. He previously served as an advisor on Russia to the Special Representative for Global Inter-governmental Affairs at the US State Department.

consortiumnews

 

France, US clash with Iran over changing nuclear accord

Syria donors fall short of UN target without US aid

Same family names in Lebanon election

Turkey jails opposition daily journalists

Iraq’s ex-football stars from sports to politics

Morocco king visits police headquarters in Temara

Western powers dismiss claim that Syria chemical attack was staged

US defense secretary says 'no decision' yet on Iran deal

Israel flash floods leave several young people missing

Highs and lows in Egypt’s Operation Sinai

416 donors to IS identified in France

Five migrants die trying to cross Mediterranean

Rights architects nominated for UK art prize

In Iraq's Anbar, election offers chance to settle scores

Philippines demands explanation after Kuwait expels ambassador

UK ‘seeking information’ over British-Iranian’s arrest

Macron says Trump may pull out of Iran nuclear deal

Turkey opposition journalists demand acquittal in terror trial

UN says Syria blocking humanitarian aid to Douma

OPCW experts visit second site of alleged Douma gas attack

Israeli policeman gets 9 months jail for killing Palestinian

US court rules for Arab Bank in precedent-setting case

Lebanese candidates pay hefty price for media coverage

Madani’s resignation sheds light on Iranian power play

Kuwait expels Filipino ambassador over treatment of workers

Syria aid donations for 2018 fall short of amount hoped

Growing anti-war sentiment in the US Congress could spell trouble for Trump

Liverpool’s Salah wins Israeli defence minister’s plaudits

Body of assassinated Palestinian driven through Malaysian capital

'Gap in perceptions' threatens wider Middle East war

UNESCO picks Morocco for project on prevention of violent extremism

Syrian regime retakes region near Damascus from rebels

Mogherini: Iran deal 'needs to be preserved'

Syria rebels prepare as Assad sets sights on next target

Iran's Rouhani questions 'right' to seek new nuclear deal

Iraq's Shiites split ahead of crucial vote

EU to Russia, Iran: Bring Syria to peace talks

Trump, Macron call for 'new' nuclear deal with Iran

Saudi Arabia claims killing of Yemen rebel leader

Syria's Idlib 'big new challenge' for international community

UNRWA chief says Palestinian aid $200 million short since Trump cuts

Bad memories resurface at Raqa’s mass grave

Turkey newspaper chief slams journalist terror trial

Setback for Yemen rebels after strike takes out leader

Saudi issues Islamic sukuk sale to finance deficit