Four Indictments in One Memo

The leak last week of the classified memo written by Donald Rumsfeld two days before he submitted his “resignation” as secretary of defense is noteworthy for several reasons, none of which may prove to be positive, all of which may prove to be further indictments of the administration.

As widely reported, the Rumsfeld memo acknowledges that the Bush administration’s strategy in Iraq “is not working well enough or fast enough” and needs a “major adjustment”. That assessment is contrary to essentially everything Rumsfeld and the White House have said publicly about the war and its progress toward ultimate objectives.

The first indictment that comes to mind is just that – having the highest levels of the U.S. government telling the public one thing while they’re telling each other something that isn’t just different, but almost diametrically opposed to what they’re telling us. I’m not naïve; I don’t expect the White House to share all of their war assessments with the public. But, I also don’t expect them to tell us something 180º out of alignment with what they’re thinking. I have so far resisted the oft-repeated mantra from the left side of the aisle that the administration has lied to us about all things Iraqi. This memo serves notice to some of us, and confirms for others, that we need to listen to these folks not just with a cocked ear but with serious doubt and skepticism. I’m probably coming late to a conclusion that millions reached several years ago, but I won’t ignore the implications of this memo.

The second indictment comes from the potential that the president will ignore the implications of this memo, and not just for the obvious reason that Rumsfeld is on his way out the door and that the Defense Department voice to tune into now is secretary-designee, Robert Gates. My concern is that the White House will discount or ignore all advice to do anything substantially different than what they’re doing now.

As we prepare to receive the long-awaited report from the Jim Baker-led Iraq Study Group, we can already see the White House casting a long, dark shadow over a couple of the recommendations that are expected to flow from that group – namely, a phased withdrawal of a substantial number of our troops by sometime in 2008 and the need to engage in direct discussions with Iran and Syria. The Rumsfeld memo could be just another piece of advice from a source supposedly respected by the president that will be largely ignored. In fact, just a couple of hours ago, Stephen Hadley, the national security advisor, characterized the Rumsfeld memo as just a “laundry list” and declared, “We have not failed in Iraq.”

The third indictment comes from the potential that the president will follow Rumsfeld’s advice on yet another evasive tack that’s laid out in his memo. The secretary expresses doubt about the administration’s ability to develop an effective alternative in Iraq (indeed, no one may be able to hit that mark). Therefore, after donning his Karl Rove look-alike mask, Rumsfeld suggests that the White House should begin to lower public expectations in order to avoid the political fallout attendant to changing our course of action, after having declared time and time again that we’re not going to change our course of action. On that point, the president said again last week that we’re “going to stay in Iraq until the job is done,” which sounds really close to the “stay the course” strategy that two weeks ago he declared we’ve never had. No one other than Tony Snow even pretended to take that hip fake.

Rumsfeld says the White House should “go minimalist” by “recast[ing] the U.S. military mission and the U.S. goals.” He goes on to say that they should “Announce that whatever new approach the U.S. decides on, the U.S. is doing so on a trial basis. This will give us the ability to readjust and move to another course, if necessary, and therefore not ‘lose’”.

There you have it – just try to misdirect and mislead the American public in whatever way is necessary to avoid the appearance of losing – after all, that’s what really matters once you’ve decided that you aren’t going to win.

The last indictment is that we’re aware of this memo at all. The week before someone in the White House leaked another classified memo, written by Hadley, in which the national security advisor cast serious doubts on the ability of the Iraqi prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, to do the job – referring to him as ignorant, incompetent or misleading (that’s not a very encouraging list to pick from).

Having someone in the White House leak two highly classified and sensitive documents regarding International Issue No. 1 may be a sign that the growing pressure and stress related to the war is pulling the administration’s seams apart. It’s possible that there may only be four people onboard the ship of state who still concur with the direction we’re sailing. Admittedly, those four people may be Bush, Cheney, Rice and Hadley, which are all the votes you need to pass any motion that may arise in a White House discussion on Iraq. Nonetheless, the sight and sound of things potentially unraveling is not good news.

But then, when it comes to Iraq, we’re fresh out of good news.