Q:Do Liberal Capitalists support the War on Terror? What about Iraq?

A:

Many on the right are careful to point out that this war is not about religion. We agree. But it is about values, and the relationship of religion and law. Indeed, one can find fewer examples more illustrative of the critical importance of liberal values and of the separation of church and state to a modern civil society than the cruel, oppressive, impoverished theocracies of the Middle East. Many on the left champion sensitivity to those of other cultures, and try to understand the mores and accomodate the aspirations of our foes. But we are classical liberals, who reject postmodernist calls for tolerence of gender bias, religious bigotry and oppression of the weak based on culture or creed. While we have no interest in global American hegemony or "national greatness," we do believe that personal liberty and equality before the law are universal human values to which all people aspire (whether or not they might wish to extend these rights to others!). We believe that our government should be mindful of those in foreign countries who do not enjoy the freedoms which we often take for granted, and try to craft foreign policy which supports liberal reforms. And those who attempt to destroy or disrupt the liberal order which has defined the American experiment from its inception we name as our enemies and resist by all principled means. Al Qaeda, this means you.

We also agree with the decision of the Bush administration to invade Iraq in 2003 (although we might take issue with various elements of the war’s execution). Our reasons for this are threefold.

Firstly, partisan politics aside, the plain fact is that all intelligence available prior to the invasion indicated that Saddam Hussein still possesed a quantity of chemical and biological weapons which he claimed were destroyed, but whose destruction could not be documented. All attempts by the UN and other inspection teams to learn the truth were foiled by trickery and gamesmanship. Saddam’s motivation for this bluff was simple enough: he needed his unfriendly neighbors to believe that he was still capable of mounting an effective defense following his defeat in the Persian Gulf War. Better intelligence from inside Iraq was unavailable, and Iraqi defectors had a vested interest in portraying Saddam as a threat. After the attacks of 9/11, the risk that Saddam actually did possess WMD’s simply became intolerable. Whatever the relations between Osama bin Laden and Saddam, they were both bad actors in the same neighborhood with a burning hatred of the United States. The fact that one might have WMD’s, while the other had money, means and motive is sufficient causus belli for the invasion of Iraq and the destruction of Saddam’s regime.

Secondly, while direct links between the regime and Al Qaeda seem few and indeterminent, it is clear that the jihadist movement is widespread, and that it is frankly unconquerable by us. It will only end when the moderate and sensible Muslims of the world  stop apologizing for their violent fellow travellers and end it. The cycle of resentment and radicalization that sustains the jihadist movement is driven by poverty, hopelessness and fear. A drain-the-swamp approach, by fostering a liberal capitalist society in the midst of this impoverished region, is a legitimate policy goal of the United States. It is also a victory for all free people to celebrate.

Lastly, as Americans we bear a great burden of responsibility to the Iraqi people. During the Persian Gulf War we sent messages to the Iraqis urging them to rise up against Saddam, and offering them support. Many did so, confident that the American military would soon arrive to back them up. But out of concern for Arab sensibilties it was decided to stop short of Baghdad, and those who rose against Saddam at our bidding were brutally slaughtered. And now we have had to return to their country anyway, bringing all the horror of war, in order to put an end to this threat, and have destroyed the only order their society possessed, rotten as it was. For these reasons we owe the Iraqis a great debt, and only freedom, our greatest national treasure, is sufficient to pay it. To this author’s mind, this debt alone is sufficient reason to have spent American blood and treasure to free Iraq. And whether we have to stay there another two years or ten years, whether we have to spend a billion more dollars, or a trillion more, we must leave the Iraqis a free and secure people. Our national honor demands nothing less.

In conclusion let me state our general philosophy of war. Liberal Capitalists disagree with the notion that war is a form of diplomacy. We believe rather that war is the collapse of diplomacy, or indeed the depressing failure of diplomacy. Military action should never be initiated until all diplomatic efforts have been exhausted. However, once the decision has been made to commit to arms, we believe that there is only one acceptable goal: total victory. We define total victory as the complete destruction or unconditional surrender of the enemy. We reason this from history, and by our reading it seems that that those who aim for something less than total victory should not be surprised if that is what they get.

Our Jacksonian approach insures that we do not send our brave volunteer soldiers to die pointlessly in conflicts that we do not intend to win. It gives greater pause to our enemies when they know that once we have commited to military action we will not stop until they have been utterly defeated. Most importantly it tends to shorten conflicts, as the longer such things go on, the more horror and destruction they produce. No one likes war or wants war; accusations to the contrary are usually just bad faith. Liberal Capitalists abhor war and seek all means to avoid it. We desire only free and peaceful trade with our neighbors. But when matters erupt into violence, we fight resolutely and to win.

Once victory has been secured, we believe that we have a moral obligation to give liberty and opportunity to those we have defeated. It is an observable fact that liberal capitalist democracies are the most free and prosperous nations on Earth. Historically, they almost never go to war against each other, either. By fostering such democracies we encourage a more peaceful world.