Not Backing Down

Donald Rumsfeld is not backing down from his recent comments about the war to the Veterans of Foreign Wars. Rumsfeld strongly criticized the press for their treatment of the war — there were far many more mentions of the negative actions of our troops than there have been recognitions of what they’re actually doing there. If the press were truly offering a balanced perspective on the war, it would be one thing. However, that is simply not the case; the coverage of this war has been shaped in a large part by an anti-military, anti-American agenda. While some of that effect has been due to laziness, much of it is shaped by a worldview that is automatically suspicious of American military power, contemptuous of our troops, and steeped in the ideology of multiculturalism.

Rumsfeld, for all his many faults, recognizes that our military must adapt to a completely new reality. Prior to the transformation doctrine began after the disastrous retreat from Mogadishu, the American military has transformed from a group of disparate and disconnected branches of service focused on stopping Soviet tanks from rushing down the Fulda Gap to an interconnected, integrated, and light force dedicated to stopping the current threat of terrorist groups who don’t follow the old ways of war. This transformative process has earned Secretary Rumsfeld many enemies among those whose bureaucratic turfs are being upended.

At the same time, our military must adapt itself to the types of warfare that we will be fighting throughout the 21st Century. Iraq is a testing ground — future conflicts are quite likely to resemble Iraq more so than conflicts we’ve fought previously. Some of what we have tried have been failures. Some of it has shown that we can fight and win in the battlefield of the 21st Century. The only way we can know for sure is by trying a wide variety of approaches and seeing what ultimately works.

Rumsfeld also recognizes that we’re fighting a war in an age where media has become absolutely pervasive. Technology empowers both us and our enemies more so than ever before: and right now our enemies are winning the media front.

American journalists do not, nor should they, abrogate their responsibilities of citizenship just because they stand in front of a keyboard or camera. Their ability to speak freely comes because of the bravery of the American soldier. A media which uncritically accepts the propaganda of the enemy while being instantly dismissive of our own military is not one which is acting as good journalists or as good citizens. Trust in the media is at one of the lowest points in history, while the military remains the most trusted institution in our society. There is good reason for that.

It is undisputed that Rumsfeld is damaged goods. His reputation, even among some supporters of the war, is greatly tarnished. At the same time, who else has the same level of vision? How many of the accusations leveled against him are the result of 20/20 hindsight and based on one-sided assessments of how this war should be fought. For all we know, adding more troops early on could have engendered even more resentment and led to an even bigger crisis than the current circumstances. The idea that it is absolutely and unequivocally true that Rumsfeld was “incompetent” for not adding more troops, or not keeping the old Iraqi Army in place, or not doing any number of things is not true. We don’t know how those factors would have helped, and it is quite possible some of them could have made things worse.

Rumsfeld understands this war. He understands the threat we face, and he understands the importance of showing absolute resolve in the face of this enemy. The calls for his head may assuage some of his critics, but the arguments that it will change the course of this war seem spurious at best.