| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Bremer defends war in Iraq, cites Iraqi ties to al-Qaeda |
| 2005-04-11 |
| Paul Bremer, former presidential envoy to Iraq, delivered a lecture titled "Iraq and the War on Terrorism" to a sold-out crowd at Bowdoin College's Morrell Gymnasium on Friday. Named presidential envoy to Iraq on May 6, 2003, Bremer served as the administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority, which governed Iraq before handing over power to an interim Iraqi government on June 28, 2004. During Friday's lecture, Bremer shared his perspective about issues leading up to and including what he calls "the liberation of Iraq." He described the state of affairs that Saddam Hussein left behind and the steps that coalition leaders took to rebuild Iraq's economy, government and social structure. Bremer started his talk by looking back to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. "I was very shocked, but not surprised," he said. Bremer asserted that the terrorists who carried out the Sept. 11 attacks were sponsored by nations — including Iraq — that were developing weapons of mass destruction for use in an international terrorist network. He went on to define the root cause of the new terrorism as "a hatred of who we are as the West; not what we do, but who we are. ... Islamic extremists are at war with the West. They want to convert or kill all non-Muslims." Bremer also shared his belief that "the hatred is reflective of Islamic society's failure to conquer Europe." Bremer went on to address the working conditions he found in Iraq. He spoke about the intense heat he dealt with on a daily basis, as well as the lack of electricity, running water and telephones. To build a stable and peaceful Iraq, Bremer found that there were three main areas that needed to be addressed: political reform, the economy and security. After asserting that torture and rape were routine elements of Saddam Hussein's style of government, Bremer pointed to the lack of universal suffrage, women's education, free press and democracy in Iraq as other signs of Saddam's oppression of his people. "It was a great and noble thing to free 27 million Iraqis," Bremer said. Less than two years after Saddam's government was ousted, he said, Iraq now has a modern constitution with a broader government, sovereignty and elections for the first time in its history. The constitution also established a balance of power, a broad range of rights — including the freedom of religion and press — and a rule of law consisting of an independent judiciary, according to Bremer. He compared the Iraqi movement for independence with the founding of the United States. "While we took seven years to win our independence and 12 to write our constitution, the Iraqis did the same in two years," he said. Focusing on the Iraqi economy under Saddam, Bremer said that the World Bank found that from 1979 to 2002, the per capita gross domestic product in Iraq dropped more than any other country in the world. "Saddam destroyed the economy through corruption," Bremer said. He asserted that the only way to fix Iraq's economy was by increasing consumption and adopting more sensible macroeconomic policies. To that end, Bremer repealed Saddam's prohibition on foreign investment, established the first central bank and figured out what to do about currency. The final area that Bremer vowed to improve was security. He found that coalition forces were fighting against Saddam's loyalists and al-Qaeda. The loyalists had a simple vision, hoping to seize power by force, while al-Qaeda strove to turn power over to a government similar to the Taliban in Afghanistan, Bremer said. He concluded his lecture by calling for patience in assessing progress in Iraq. "Much like the fight against Soviet communism, this fight needs to be fought with patience. The good news is that we can do it. Everything in our history shows that we can," he said. In the question-and-answer session that followed, Bremer was asked why his statements sound so self-assured. He responded, "If I sound self-assured, it's because I am sure. I've studied terrorism for 30 years." He defended himself when asked how he can say that the war isn't motivated by a neo-conservative agenda, including advancing corporate interests in oil fields. "I'm not a neo-conservative," he said. "Oil had nothing to do with any discussions. When you take your next trip to Iraq, I would be glad to get together with you." As for when we can expect U.S. troops to come home, Bremer said, "This can be answered schematically, when two lines cross. When the number of terrorist incidents goes down and when the quality of Iraqi security forces goes up." Reaction to Bremer's talk was mixed. The most memorable comment of the night for sophomore Zach Linhart, the director of media affairs for the Bowdoin College Republicans, was "when a student tried to tell Ambassador Bremer that he was wrong about what is happening in Iraq and Bremer simply responded, 'When is the last time you were in Iraq?' Of course, the questioner had never been to Iraq and was contradicting Bremer purely on propaganda read in the liberal media." Rachel Kaplan, president of the Bowdoin College Democrats, had a different reaction. "Bremer failed to address the complexity of issues regarding the war that students really questioned," she said. Professor Shelley Deane of the college's government and legal studies department found the Bremer talk interesting in the sense that "what was left unsaid was as important if not more important than what was said. I would have liked to have heard the 'real answer' to the question he delicately danced past, namely what had he learned and what he would do differently. A more fulfilling answer to this question might well have appealed to as well as won over skeptics." Deane currently teaches a class on Middle East politics. |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #3 He defended himself when asked how he can say that the war isn’t motivated by a neo-conservative agenda, including advancing corporate interests in oil fields Sigh.... more utter horseshit from the clueless MSM. Again, repeat after me: the oil companies wanted to do business with Saddam, not overthrow him. The policies urged by Wolfowitz et al were exactly counter to what every oil company on the planet was urging. The neo-cons have zero interest in advancing the agenda or interests of the oil majors. When will this biggest of Big Lies finally be put to rest? |
| Posted by: thibaud (aka lex) 2005-04-11 10:14:45 PM |
| #2 It will not be long before they are classed as 1st-world power, perhaps even becoming the heart of a future "middle-east common market" bloc. IF they can keep it. |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2005-04-11 9:35:45 PM |
| #1 Paul Bremer has nothing to defend. He has made of Iraq far more than MacArthur made of post-war Japan, and proportionally more can be expected of Iraq in the future because of it. It will dominate the entire middle east through a combination of a triple-A gold plated financial system and an ordered, rational and transparent government, the likes of which is unique in the world. Bremer was able to pick and choose the very best of what makes a modern nation, setting the Iraqis up for unimagined prosperity, development, and sustainability. It will not be long before they are classed as 1st-world power, perhaps even becoming the heart of a future "middle-east common market" bloc. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-04-11 4:47:11 PM |