Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Jack Kemp :: Townhall.com Columnist
'Making War to Keep Peace' is a fine tribute to Jeane Kirkpatrick
by Jack Kemp
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Former Ambassador Jeane J. Kirkpatrick, one of the most admired women in the world, passed away in December at the age of 80, leaving a huge vacuum in our hearts and minds. Her posthumously published book, "Making War to Keep Peace" (Harper Collins, $26.95), released April 24, brings her ideas to life.

The book is devoted to her foreign policy experiences and reflections from 1981 to 2006. Jeane had a way of providing and applying a clear worldview for debating, discussing and deciding U.S. foreign policy in a complex and complicated world.

Kirkpatrick's friends and colleagues, from William F. Buckley and George P. Schultz, to Edwin Meese and Ed J. Feulner, to Richard V. Allen and Alan Gerson, are helping review, publicize and promote her incredible experiences and prescient views about the future. She envisioned a future of democracy, freedom, stability, and principled leadership undergirded by wise U.S. policies from the departments of State and Defense.

"Making War to Keep Peace" is the book's provocative title, made particularly ironic in my thinking because Kirkpatrick was primarily responsible for that great aphorism of "peace through strength," which became the hallmark of President Ronald W. Reagan's views on foreign policy that she so vigorously defended during her years at the United Nations.

Jeane was never one to shrink from a critic and already there are detractors. David Corn in the "left-leaning" magazine The Nation takes a rather gratuitous slap at the Bush-Cheney administration. Corn quotes from the book, "I was privately critical of the Bush administration's argument for the use of military force for pre-emptive self-defense," and "that the war - with respect to bringing democracy to Iraqis - did more harm than good." Corn then concludes, "It's stunning criticism from a hawk who for over two decades has been a guiding light for the neocons, who cheerleaded the nation to war in Iraq. In her book, she contends that the invasion has so far been counterproductive." While Jeane was a quiet critic of the war, she was a loyal diplomat until the end and never was a cheerleader for the neocons.

Corn also writes, "She does not say where and to whom she voiced her misgivings - if she did." I can only add that in my private talks with Kirkpatrick over the years since we co-founded Empower America with Vin Weber, Bill Bennett, Michael Novak and Ted Forstmann, she never put her own private views above those or whom were responsible for making the very difficult decisions required of presidents, then and now.

I wasn't the only one discussing the Iraqi war and U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East with my friend, my mentor and my neighbor, Ambassador Kirkpatrick, as she had many close friends and confidants on both the "center left" and "center right". They ranged from Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., and Ambassador Max Kampelman to Novak, Ernie Lefevre, and Gerson, among others. But I can say for a fact, she unambiguously supported the effort to liberate Afghanistan after the terror attacks of Sept. 11. She also voiced quiet yet thoughtful critique of this administration and the neocons' rather cavalier assurance that the United States could establish a liberal democracy in Iraq as a model of "statecraft" for the Islamic Middle East. Kirkpatrick was aware that - with no history of stable institutions, or rule of law, and with a vacuum of power that left centrifugal forces spinning out of control - it would require more than a surge of troops to be successful. The situation demands an immediate surge of diplomacy at which she was so good.

Corn's conclusion that Kirkpatrick considered the war a mistake is derived from Kirkpatrick's comments about her own career, to wit, "Throughout my career, I have been careful not to criticize any sitting president, and I was not inclined to change my position in that regard when President George W. Bush sent troops across the border of Iraq. In fact, when asked, I even agreed to defend his actions. I believe then as I believe now that President Bush had the legal right to invade Iraq, if not entirely for the reasons his administration claimed. However. I also believe that he had neither the obligation nor the need to expand his military offensive into Iraq after sending troops into Afghanistan."

Many of us arrived at the same conclusion and we supported the administration's troop "surge" in the opinion that pacification of Baghdad and Anbar Province, plus regional talks, would lead to a political settlement. I truly believe that's where she'd be today.

During many private talks with her and my wife Joanne and family, Kirkpatrick would reflect on what in her words she described, "The key to putting Iraq on the path of democracy today is to help establish law and order. This policy is already part of the Bush administration plan, but as of this writing their strategy remains unclear. However, history offers hope for Iraq's future. Battles in other countries that seemed unwinnable have come to peace - and victory."

It seems obvious to me with these words, she was not advocating the left-wing desire to get out of Iraq post haste. It's no secret Kirkpatrick advocated early on in the Reagan administration for a more "free market" oriented foreign policy as an important ingredient to any successful pursuit of conflict resolution. She and I talked at length about how the United States used economic aid, trade and investment to help rebuild World War II-ravaged Germany and Japan as the bipartisan Marshall Plan emerged from the Truman administration and was supported by the GOP in the Senate.

Based on this great book, her public statements and our private conversations over the years, Jeane Kirkpatrick was a seasoned diplomat, wise counselor to several presidents and a voice for liberal democracy who understood perfectly the demand for our United States of America to be a "shining city on a hill." We must lead the free world by example while defending ourselves from terrorists intent on imposing their will on friend and foe. We are fortunate to have a great secretary of state who brings many of the same characteristics of Ambassador Kirkpatrick to our efforts. They are as needed today as they were in the early 1980s, even more so.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Jack Kemp is Founder and Chairman of Kemp Partners and a contributing columnist to Townhall.com.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Jack Kemp's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
mary-go-boy
Have you read any of Machiavelli's works? That childish video tries to badmouth pseudo-cons (nee neocons) by asserting Machiavelli. I will never understand this modern scummy society of mine that will embrace that monster Sun Tsu and ignore Machiavelli and Kipling. Ah, but Sun Tsu had epicanthic folds, that makes him 'cool'.

" However. I also believe that he had neither the obligation nor the need to expand his military offensive into Iraq after sending troops into Afghanistan."

If Kirkpatrick said this, she was wrong. Speaking of Neocons, Mr. Kemp... WTF is wrong with you? This is a WAR, the entire world is in play. How many diplomatic missions did we send to Japan after Pearl Harbor to find a "diplomatic" solution? NONE.

If your goal is to bring democracy to the middle east, then, yes, you must A) have diplomacy and B) have a job somewhere OTHER than in my government!

The goal always should have been a pacification of the middle-east, with an end to the Islamic threat, and an assured supply of oil. Democracy for Iraq was the long, expensive, easy course (for politicians with no Malkins). But somewhere along the line our politicians forget that they work for US, not the world, and certainly not for desert trash. Invading Iraq and Afghanistan were great first steps in breaking up, isolating, and ultimately vanquishing the Islamic states in the region. But Bush... I was going to say "wimped out" but considering that his friends and interests are IN the middle east, it's virtually certain that everything is going as planned... by those pulling his chain.



Sorry,
Youtube doesn't compare with minds such as Machiavelli and Kipling.

Yes, I'm famiiar with that movie, I've probably seen it more times than you can count.

Is your point that you're just babbling and tossing random links about?

I repeat, your first youtube video attempted to defame pseudocons by associating them with Machiavelli. Machiavelli was wise, experienced and knowledgeable about the trustworthiness of politicians and the machinations of gov't. The Neocons should study Machiavelli, and become real conservatives, while learning about the manipulative plottings of the liberals.

What that movie has to do with what we've been discussing escapes me.

About Jeane
Forgive me for speaking ill of the dead, but Jeane Kirkpatrick (contrary to Kemp) was not admired around the world. She was an ally of the most warrior-like neocons who seemed to think that was was some kind of game. I never noticed any interest or concern on her part for the thousands killed and maimed in her game. She was arrogant, tragically misinformed, and dead wrong on many vital issues.

She said one great thing
And that is that she would wave goodbye as the U.N. left our shores.

Roy...

Get it right; neocons are NOT warrior-like. Kemp is a neocon. Neocons are often Rinos.

To jdw
Re your suggestion that the Neoconservatives should study Machiavelli: indeed they already have. Go to "Leo Strauss' Philsophy of Deception" for a concise summary of Neoconservative political philosophy. Observe that a strong leader must be an amoral leader, doing whatever is necessary to accomplish his goals; deception is especially recommended. "The end justfies the means," say the Neoconservatives. That's pure Machiavelli. The entire text of "The Prince" is online, BTW.

A credit to my generation
On the few occasions that I was privileged to meet Jeane and listen to her briefing on UN activites or world events, I was impressed by her logic and insight. Peace through Strength is reminiscent of Peace is our profession that I once honored as a B-47 navigator. The interesting thing about both is that it was the strength and power, not diplomacy that brought a rather uneasy end to the cold war. They are both extensions of the admonition of Teddy Roosevelt to walk softly, but carry a big stick that fortunately became the watch word for American foreign policy only because we were willing to use the big stick when it became necessary that is still honored by conservative Republicans including President Bush. It may be too optimistic to believe that we can import democracy in the mainstream with radical Islam in the light of history, but he does understand that it is far better to fight terrorism in their own arena instead of ours. I am glad the political cowards that want to cut and run and slink home again in ignominious defeat like they did in Vietnam are not at the helm of our nation. If they ever make it to power, our nation will no longer have the strength or the power or the will to ensure peace. Can anarchy be far behind?

Lilly
That is not pure Machiavelli, that is a misinterpretation of Machiavelli. That they read Machiavelli is not evidence of their flaws, which is what the video suggests.
(And to my knowledge, Machavelli never lopped of an innocent woman's head to make a point about the effectiveness of terror on your own people. But praise be Sun Tsu!)

I don't need the internet to read The Prince; my copy is on my bookshelf across the room.

"Machiavelli's name does not rank in the noble company of scientists. in the common opinion of men, his name itself has become a term of reproach and dishonor...
"Why should this be? If our reference is to the views that Machiavelli in fact held, that he stated plainly, openly and clearly in his writings, there is in the common opinion no truth at all... it is true that he taught tyrants, from his own days - Thomas Cromwell, for example, the lowborn Chancellor whom Henry VIII brought in to replace Thomas More when More refused to make his conscience a tool of his majesty's interests, was said to have a copy of Machiavelli always in his pocket; and in our time Mussolini wrote a college thesis on Machiavelli. But knowledge has a disturbing neutrality in this respect. We do not blame the research analyst who has solved the chemical mysteries of a poison because a murderer made use of his treatise...
"We are, I think, and not only from the fate of Machiavelli's reputation, forced to conclude that men do not really want to know about themselves... Perhaps the full disclosure of what we are and how we act is too violent a medicine.
"In any case, whatever may be the desires of most men, it is most certainly against the interests of the powerful that the truth should be known about political behavior. if the political truths stated by Machiavelli were widely known, the success of tyranny would become much less likely. If men understood as much of the mechanism of rule and privilege as Machiavelli understood, they would no longer be deceived int accepting that rule and privilege, and they would know what steps to take to overcome them.
"Therefore the powerful and their spokesmen - all the 'official' thinkers, the lawyers, and philosophers and preachers and demagogues - must defame Machiavelli. Machiavelli says that rulers lie and break faith; this proves, they say, that he libels human nature. Machiavelli says that ambitious men struggle for power; he is apologizing for the opposition, the enemy, and trying to confuse you about us, who wish to lead you for your own good and welfare. Machiavelli says that you must keep strict watch over officials and subordinate them to the law; he is encouraging subversion and the loss of national unity. Machavelli says that no man with power is to be trusted; you see that his aim is to smash all your faith and ideals.
"Small wonder that the powerful - in public - denounce Machiavelli. The powerful have a long practice in sizing up their opposition. They can recognize an enemy who will never compromise, even when that enemy is so abstract as a body of ideas"
-James Burnham "The Machiavellians"

"Where neither their property nor their honor is touched, most men live content." - M (a lesson liberals never knew, and pseudocons (aka neocons) have forgotten.

"Gold may not get you good soldiers, but good soldiers can always get you gold." - M
"Among other evils which being unarmed brings you, it causes you to be despised." -M (on the VTech massacre)
"Where the willingness is great, the difficulties cannot be great" - M (on victory in the Iraqi theatre of the War on Terror)
"There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things." - M (on democracy in Iraq)

And my favorite:

"God is unwilling to do everything, and thereby take from us our free will, and that share of glory that belongs to us." - M

To understand and accept this is to join the ranks of Men.

jdw
Neocons are warrior-like, certain that the USA should rule the world. No, I don't view Kemp as one of them. He's quasi-moderate compared to neocons. Among prominent neocons are those like Wolfowitz, Feith, Perle and Abrams who were heavily motivated by their desire to crush any of Israel's enemies. Saddam was one of them. Now, some loud neocons are beating the drums, hoping to incite us against Iran. Real patriots, truly interested in America's welfare, must resist all the propaganda aimed at that goal.

Some key neocons were old-time Trotskyites -a version of communism - who believe in world domination. Once they became disillusioned with that ism they tranferred the same worldview to the USA. They joined with chickenhawks, Christian extremists, power-hungry exiles, and greedy manipulators in the military-industrial complex to push us into a foolish war in Iraq.

Let me summarize the 'accomplishments' of the Iraq War to date:

(1) the death of Saddam and his equally evil sons;
(2) 3200 innocent US military killed, over 20,000 injured, many maimed for life.
(3) tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis killed;
(4) alienation of most of our allies who had gone with us into Afghanistan, something we had to do after 9-11 - attack the terrorists;
(5) the USA now among the most disrespected countries in the world, with only Israel, North Korea and Iran ranking lower'
(6) Iran emboldened and more powerful;
(7) Iraq likely to become an Islamic theocracy, while before Saddam was a secularist despised by bin Laden as an infidel. Women, by the way, were treated quite well in Saddam's time - did not need to be covered and usually weren't. Christians treated well, also. This does not excuse Saddam, of course. He gassed his own people, by the way, when we were supporting him!
(8) Osama bin Laden still missing;
(9) USA spending billions upon billions, going deeper and deeper into debt - a trillion or more on that war before we get out of Iraq;
(10) military-industrial complex (remember Ike's warning) pocketing billions in profit, some of it stolen;
(11) American people, united after 9-11, now in bitterly opposing camps;
(12) burden of Iraq falling on very few Americans - the rest living as usual;
(13) war now on two fronts, with the Taliban and Al Qaeda reemerging in Afghanistan while our attention and military have been distracted by Iraq;
(14) Israel is in greater danger, along with our other Middle East allies. Ironically, the Israeli lobby and its American fans pushed hard for our invasion of Iraq. Israel was the only nation outside the USA where most of the people approved of our preemptive attack.
(15) we had been warned about WMDs and assured by many 'experts' - Chalibi, Wolfowitz, Feith, etc. - that we would be welcomed with flowers, that the war would be over very soon, that Iraqi oil would pay for the war, and other nonsense.

That's 15 - a round number so we'll leave it at that. Read them and weep. Remember, too, that the Pope and most mainline USA Protestant churches opposed the invasion of Iraq.








Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.