margaret wente: wrong again

ahhh, margaret wente. such a clever writer but so prone to constructing paper dragons out of complex arguments only so that she can decimate them easily. it must be so dissatisfying though to 'win' an argument but then know that you really haven't met it head on- that you've surreptiously curved beyond the battle to some sort of 'home free' zone where intellectual honesty isn't required.

her argument isn't an unimportant one: that we're being too hard on the american occupation of iraq; that it would have been moronic to turn the prisons over tot he iraqis after occupation and that if we continue to be this harsh on the americans, no one will ever want to intervene for humanitarian purposes. fair enough but her assumptions make much her poingnancy turn to fluff.

to buy her argument, we have to accept her assumption that the us entered this war on the ground of 'humanitarian intervention'. at the end of her column she likens this to another rwanda. the irony, of course, is that the us did nothing for rwanda. so, this raises the question: why iraq? that we should judge the us as some sort of humanitarian saints who have entered this war only for the good of the iraqi people is not an easy pill to swallow.

next on my hit list is wente's claim that we're being too harsh on america- that because they've spent $87 million and been willing to take the lead, they should be protected somehow from any generalised criticism. this is ridiculous. if the iraqi regime was overthrown in the pursuit of calmer, gentler ends then we must hold the us occupation to the same standards. even more problematic, however, is that this is an 'occupation' which places a whole new spin on how judgemental i think we're allowed to be. this was not simply an outster but a takeover and therefore the us military, effectively the new iraqi government, needs to be criticised in the same way that you can blame the canadian government when a doctor treats you badly at a hospital they pay for. if this was simply a bit of assistance to remove an ugly government hanging on too long, the us might escape criticism for simply being the messenger. however, with haliburton on the payroll and america in control, the us better be ready to face criticism for their rule of post-war iraq.

wente's call to thanks for the us ends with this plea that if we make occupation difficult, no one will want to do it. the reality is that occupation/liberation/humanitarian intervention is complex and if criticism is going to stop the strong believers in human rights, then i worry about how committed they truly are to the concept...

. . .