How to deal with Iran

By Rick Morris

Rumors have run rampant for years now that the Bush administration plans an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities before it leaves office in January 2009. Certainly, the move by the mullahs to acquire nuclear weapons is a frightening one that should be focusing our energies on how best to protect our interests in the Persian Gulf.

But military intervention is not the only avenue open to us in the area. My longtime friend Scott Pullins has announced that his Pullins Report is part of a wide coalition dedicated to pursuing other means of addressing our very real issues with the regime in Tehran.

Ironically, while I'm a bit unsure as to the utility of free and unfettered talks with Iran right now, I support Scott's general efforts 100%. As with his stance on the treatment of detainees, I may differ with him here and there, but I think his general focus is exactly right.

He and I have traveled down parallel political paths, which helps me to understand and to support his present direction a bit better. We were both of college age at the end of the Cold War and we were both very hawkish given the realities of the day. Essentially, while shooting in that war was rare and generally confined to proxies (i.e. Vietnam, Afghanistan), it really WAS a war and we needed to be on a war footing when dealing with a grim enemy which hungered for nothing less than world domination. Ronald Reagan's method of confronting the Soviets directly, which was totally unprecedented, was appropriate and it worked -- and Scott and I supported him.

But we are now in a different time. The conservative movement long ago fractured into the (completely dominant) neoconservative wing and my paleocon wing. The neocons never moved from the "war footing" mentality and seemed well before 9/11 to be searching for any excuse to project American military might upon the world. For all the talk about how Eeee-Vil Republicans tried to destroy the Clintons with the impeachment saga, the neocons stood behind Bubba steadfastly as he wagged the dog with a completely unnecessary war in the Balkans in 1999.

George W. Bush, about whom I can honestly say I was skeptical from the very beginning given my aversion to Republican Establishment figures, came to office promising a humble, respectful foreign policy. But, as the cliche goes, "9/11 changed everything."

The foreign policy "realists" that Scott and I scorned in our youth were wrong then -- I will always believe that. But, given today's circumstances, they are right in this climate.

I have said on The FDH Lounge program that George W. Bush and Bill Clinton each accomplished the same dubious action -- by opposite means. Clinton destroyed American deterrence in the '90s by turning a blind eye to each successive attack by bin Laden and establishing us as a paper tiger. Bush destroyed American deterrence by getting us bogged down in Iraq from the end of the first phase of the war in April '03 until he FINALLY delivered the surge in 2007 -- thus reestablishing us as a paper tiger after restoring our global prestige by winning swiftly in Afghanistan in late 2001. Imperial overreach and pacifism both lead to disaster and to America's enemies licking their chops.

The neocons are right in the very narrow sense about staying on the offensive against Al Qaeda worldwide and this is a job that our special forces should continue to be pursuing in every nook and cranny of the globe regardless of who gets elected president in November (although I'm admittedly scared that Barack Obama will not agree with this basic common-sense point). But starting full-on conflagrations against other governments without fully thinking through the consequences -- haven't we been here before? Every Deskbound Rambo who proclaimed in 2002-2003 that Iraq would be a cakewalk should be permanently prohibited from being taken seriously.

George W. Bush and Karl Rove, who openly dreamed of creating another longstanding Republican dynasty in the mold of William McKinley, have seen their dreams die in the sands of the Middle East much in the same way that Jimmah Carter's aspirations did. To the extent that their militaristic brand of neoconservatism is left to define the Republican party and the broader American Right, then the party and the movement will never recover. That's why, in addition to personal friendship, I support Scott's efforts as strongly as I do. The school of thought about what's best for this country, as well as the country itself, is too important to be left to the rotting corpse known as GOP leadership. Whether you support every individual thread of anti-neocon policy, it's time to get with the program and work for the clear best interests of this country. If opposition to rampant militarism is ceded to the peaceniks and pinkos, we all lose.

RIP William F. Buckley Jr.

By Rick Morris

Today saw the passing of an icon, one of the truly influential figures of the second half of the 20th century. Perhaps fittingly, William F. Buckley Jr. passed away at his desk, probably preparing another brilliant column from his incomparable mind.

Almost singlehandedly, he helped forge what would come to be known as the conservative movement in the mid-1950s, when the New Deal was still the dominant influence in national politics and good old placid Ike was presiding over a solidification of the second American Revolution that FDR instituted by executive fiat two decades before (just as Ike's VP Tricky Dick Nixon would end up strengthening LBJ's Great Society in the early '70s). There was no countervailing force in the USA standing up for the concept of limited government and a muscular, forward-thinking approach in the Cold War. Bill Buckley pioneered the power that would capture the White House in the form of Reaganism a quarter-century later.

There were times when he would take stands that would annoy his friends and followers. I myself was annoyed by a few of his columns, but that's probably not too bad considering that I've read hundreds of them. What he accomplished was as unique as it was impressive: he pulled together strains from disparate sources and created a coherent intellectual and political movement that will outlive him for centuries, even though it is severely bruised at the moment.

I was influenced greatly by his National Review magazine and I was thrilled as a young public policy intern in D.C. to find a treasure trove of old NRs boxed up in the basement of the living quarters I inhabited at the time. I wasn't permitted to take any of them with me, but I greatly enjoyed delving into the chance to see how Buckley and his writers were assessing the important events of the Cold War era as they unfolded. That same year, as a young firebrand attending the Young Americans for Freedom national convention, I had the pleasure of hearing Buckley speak to our banquet. I was thrilled for my good friend Stu Grimes, who had become a national officer of the group and consequently got to be photographed shaking hands with the legend himself. YAF is an important although overlooked part of the Buckley legacy, as he helped found the group and write one of the most important philosophical statements of our time, The Sharon Statement:

"In this time of moral and political crises, it is the responsibility of the youth of America to affirm certain eternal truths.

We, as young conservatives, believe:

That foremost among the transcendent values is the individual's use of his God-given free will, whence derives his right to be free from the restrictions of arbitrary force;

That liberty is indivisible, and that political freedom cannot long exist without economic freedom;

That the purpose of government is to protect those freedoms through the preservation of internal order, the provision of national defense, and the administration of justice;

That when government ventures beyond these rightful functions, it accumulates power, which tends to diminish order and liberty;

That the Constitution of the United States is the best arrangement yet devised for empowering government to fulfill its proper role, while restraining it from the concentration and abuse of power;

That the genius of the Constitution- the division of powers- is summed up in the clause that reserves primacy to the several states, or to the people, in those spheres not specifically delegated to the Federal government;

That the market economy, allocating resources by the free play of supply and demand, is the single economic system compatible with the requirements of personal freedom and constitutional government, and that it is at the same time the most productive supplier of human needs;

That when government interferes with the work of the market economy, it tends to reduce the moral and physical strength of the nation; that when it takes from one man to bestow on another, it diminishes the incentive of the first, the integrity of the second, and the moral autonomy of both;

That we will be free only so long as the national sovereignty of the United States is secure; that history shows periods of freedom are rare, and can exist only when free citizens concertedly defend their rights against all enemies;

That the forces of international Communism are, at present, the greatest single threat to these liberties;

That the United States should stress victory over, rather than coexistance with, this menace; and

That American foreign policy must be judged by this criterion: does it serve the just interests of the United States?"

It's because of the esteem I have had for so long for National Review that I have not hesitated to criticize it harshly on this blog during this presidential primary season when I felt it lost its way. To reopen those issues today would be disrespectful to Bill Buckley, but I'll note that I firmly believe that the magazine would have been in much better shape had he not bowed out in 2004 -- although I certainly don't begrudge him his right to take it a bit easier in his golden years with his health declining.

The outpouring today on National Review Online is heartening and may portend the beginning of the revival of NR and, dare we hope, perhaps the broader movement it represents. Any column written about him deserves to be read, but I especially suggest the following:

^ the symposium featuring mini-columns from many right-wing luminaries

^ John O'Sullivan's take on how WFB helped to win the Cold War

^ the NRO editorial noting his passing

^ thoughts from many of his appreciative fans

I'm heartened to read in the tributes such an awareness of the specific functions he performed in terms of helping to reshape American political thought. At a time when the conservative movement has lost its way, maybe the refocusing that WFB's passing has brought can regenerate it for a new generation. If you believe in Providential acts as I do, that might have even been the cause of the timing. We can only hope so, and the old genius would no doubt see this as the ultimate tribute. Godspeed Bill Buckley.

Putin the Czar tries to restart the Cold War

By Rick Morris

As Mad Vlad Putin goes through the motions of the farce called Russian “democracy,” he has demonstrated yet again that his move from president to prime minister will change nothing and he will continue to wield the real power. His latest campaign stunt shows the price the world will pay for the route he has chosen to hang on to power.

The denunciation he made of the West (read: America) for alleged meddling in internal affairs in the 1990s is part and parcel of what has been an unfortunate strategy: earning the sympathy of the public by scapegoating foreign powers. As a child of the Cold War, I believed at the time that the Russian people were a noble folk oppressed by a vicious dictatorship. Sadly, I look back now and see a very naïve attitude on my part. Throughout history, the Russians have traditionally yielded to authoritarian governments of one type or another. Now, less than two decades after throwing off the yoke of the Soviet Union peacefully and in unprecedented fashion, the people of Russia are serving as willing co-conspirators in a backslide to a police state.

Putin’s emerging Hitler Youth equivalent has been chronicled here previously and is a vital part of his wicked plan. And the rhetoric about the conspiracies of other nations has been lapped up like vodka by the denizens of this arrogant nation.

If the America-baiting was simply serving as red meat to pacify the people and neutralize internal opposition to the Putin Cult of Personality, it would be bad enough. But Putin is also walking the walk in international affairs, forging agreements with the tyrants of China, Iran, Venezuela and every other entity determined to jab a sharp stick in the eye of Uncle Sam. Everything takes a back seat to an anti-American agenda, from preventing the horrors that may arise from nuclear proliferation to keeping oil prices stable to prevent hurting innocents in the Third World to keeping international terrorists in check.

I will maintain again, though, that the unilateralism of the Bush administration played right into Putin’s hands. Clearly, Putin wanted to go down this path all along, but an American policy of trying to install military bases in former Soviet satellite countries did not help matters. When dealing with an insidious head of state who is acting as a de facto enemy, the United States must muster every bit possible of craftiness. By this definition, we have not acted in our best interests in a long time and we need to start as soon as possible.

James Dolan gots to pay!

By Rick Morris

Isiah is guilty! Surprise!!!

Fittingly, though, he escapes personal accountability yet again as has been the case ever since he retired from the Pistons -- MSG is left holding the bag for 11.6 mil and they're not going to take it out of his hide. That money could sure buy you a pretty thorough personnel screening service, but since when has the Garden been interested in that?

Oh, and nice move by the NBA to keep this news both off of the front page and "news" page of their website. What a gutless move by the Association to try the "hear no evil, see no evil" routine as if we all lived in Cold War-era Eastern Europe and they could keep the news from us if they don't mention it. But the Knickerbockers have been league favorites dating back to the frozen envelope and before, so this is predictable but still sad.

Untold story: the KGB's frightening comeback

By Rick Morris

The Russian Bear has returned. In a supremely compelling cover story this week in The Economist, the comeback of the KGB in the form of its successor the FSB is illuminated in chilling detail. While we in the West have deluded ourselves over the past 15 years that the Cold War is dead and buried, it has slowly arisen again -- and with Russia playing footsie with China, Venezuela, Iran and a number of formidable anti-American players worldwide, we're staring down a new threat at a time when we can't afford to be diverted from pursuing the Global War on Terror. We certainly don't have a global alliance to deal with Russia and its axis similar to the anti-communist umbrella of the Cold War.

Although it is an excellent account of how Russia's turn away from the West has materialized, the Economist's story surprisingly does not contain any information about another key factor in this sad development: Nashi. This anti-American youth group has become a slavish tool of Russian President Putin as he re-institutes the domestic tyranny present throughout much of the country's history. Nashi is a frightening and powerful force in Russia, instilling hatred of the West. These articles are stark warnings of the successes they have enjoyed to date.

While I believe that Putin has plotted all along to take Russia down this path, I also see much that our government has done to play into his hands over the past decade. After we went into Afghanistan, our government had the bright idea to try to place military bases in former Soviet republics, ignoring the sense of paranoia it would stir up in Russia. The same can be said of our decision to expand NATO right up to Russia's doorstep -- that was a classic example of something in international affairs that was undeniably moral, but was anything but helpful to our national interest. In a presidential debate in 2000, George W. Bush pledged to instill a new humility in American global affairs. Had he followed though on his promise, Putin would not have had as easy a time in turning Russia into USSR 2K7.

Annual list proves many of us are quite old

By Rick Morris

It's that time of year again. The Beloit College Mindset List has just been issued for the tenth year. No doubt, you've received this list previously via email spam from your friends -- it's the one with the theme that reads something like "This year's incoming college freshmen have never ..."

Personally, I started to feel a bit old the year that the list indicated that incoming college freshmen would not have had knowledge of an Atari 2600. That was a staple of my youth! But like many other people in their thirties, the list just rubs more salt in the wound each year. This year, a major theme of the list is that incoming college freshmen did not grow up in a world with the Berlin Wall or, more broadly speaking, the Cold War. Now, as a child of the Cold War and someone whose geopolitical references were framed by it (in a reactionary manner, naturally!), that's depressing enough.

But no Berlin Wall? I remember as though it were yesterday November 9, 1989, watching the wall come down while pounding celebratory vodka with a great friend and fellow college right-wing firebrand -- today known as Ohio's finest public policy and legal expert, Scott Pullins. If memory serves correctly, that was also the night (during Sweeps Month, naturally) that the Cheers episode aired in which Carla's husband got killed by a runaway Zamboni. Unfortunately, after the Cheers and Berlin Wall revelry was done, I still had to go work an overnight shift at the school newspaper with a whole lot of 80-proof vodka in my system. Suffice it to say, that's the kind of youthful mistake you only make once! Scott, who got to sleep off his fun immediately, was smarter than me even back then.

Clearly, I have vivid memories of that great moment in time, but now those images are tainted by the unmistakable fact that I am now "the old guy who remembers the way it was back then." I'm sure I'll get over it -- until next August when the list comes out and says that incoming college freshmen never knew a world in which we weren't at odds with Saddam Hussein.