Owning up to our role

A Quiet Transformation

By David Ignatius

Wednesday, May 18, 2005; Page A1

This article makes us confront some of the burdens that we'll likely have to take on over this new century. I am grudgingly coming to the belief that the United States is by far the biggest stabilizing force in a politically fractious, high-stakes game. Iraq was tough to swallow. They rushed in there on shady pretenses, and they really didn't know what they were getting into. But the way they're talking about the future of the mideast, and increasingly elsewhere, is in many ways inspiring.

The scarry part is whose mouth it's coming from. I mean, guys like John Negroponte were definitely in a don't ask, don't tell relationship with paramilitary deathsquads. There was a real "gotta break some eggs to make an omelet" mentality in the years where the CIA became entrenched in guerrilla groups, political parties, and governemnts throughout the world. But then again, there are a lot of thoughtful people who've become swept up in this. Guys like Paul Wolfowitz, who was ambassador to Indonesia during Suharto and all that. He is a good guy, and never intended to kill anyone until recently.

Think of how Thomas Friedman sees things, and you can picture an alternative ethos to this Nixon-era thug turned born-again thing that's currently going on.

This means that moderates, or at least people with view-points, allegiences, and hand-up-puppet's-ass-type relationships that are at least different to these guys have simply must get involved in this effort. I remember having lunch with a college roommate back in 1999. He was going to Officer Candidate School to become a Marine. I'd had a lot of good talks with him about a range of issues. I got to thinking about what the future role of our influences (military, diplomatic...) and it occured to me that with all that labor, management know-how, can-do attitudes, we could do a lot of good too. We could dig irrigation ditches, give kids vaccinations, get them in school... My friend completely agreed. Though I lost touch with him, I'm glad that he's an officer now, probably a higher-up serving in Iraq. He's a real humanitarian.

All I know is that there is something to this "neo-colonial" approach. We don't go into places with pith helmets, intent on all the natives learning to drink high tea, and casting aside their false idols. We go in there as advisors and helpers, not as overseers. The sense that "what's good for the world is good for us" needs to supplant the age-old premise that, "what's good for us is good for the world."