{"id":1638,"date":"2008-02-14T23:15:12","date_gmt":"2008-02-14T23:15:12","guid":{"rendered":"0"},"modified":"2008-02-15T02:26:35","modified_gmt":"2008-02-15T02:26:35","slug":"this_quality_co","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/?p=1638","title":{"rendered":"This Quality Commentary Brought To You By Senior Members Of The Progblog Commentatariat…"},"content":{"rendered":"

Here’s Spencer Ackerman<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Hanlon went to Iraq, saw that the surge is teh awesomez0rs, and wrote an op-ed<\/a> suggesting that he was anti-war until he saw the fruits of a successful strategy. Only…Hanlon wasn’t ever anti-war, and he was taken on a Potemkin tour of Iraq. The bloggers started ripping him to shreds<\/a>, resulting in an embattled O’Hanlon drifting further rightward and becoming more bilious. Call it Joe Lieberman Syndrome. In a different context, he’d be Ja Rule in the middle of the 50 Cent beef<\/a> that ended his career. Today in the Wall Street Journal<\/i>, O’Hanlon’s got yet another tendentious op-ed<\/a>, in which he bravely subdues yet another straw man on the left. As you read it, you can practically hear, “We gon’ clap back… We gon’ clap back…”<\/a> <\/p>\n

Harder to understand is how the foreign-policy establishment doesn’t put him out to pasture. Like the Bolton aide at the barbecue, few are willing to say publicly that O’Hanlon doesn’t know what he’s talking about, no matter how widespread that opinion actually is behind closed doors and over beers. Case in point: a friend passes along this piece of O’Hanlon-related intelligence:<\/p>\n

<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\n

I have a friend who worked on the Iraq Study Group<\/a>, who told me they brought [O’Hanlon] in, along with the other 20 or 30 other experts on the various working groups. They found his recommendations to be both vacuous and moronic.  The man is an empty shell.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

<\/p>\n

Please, Hanlon, let it go, homie. Call it a day. You’re a young man and it’s a great big wonderful world out there, full of possibilities.<\/p>\n

<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In otherwords, instead of engaging the actual points Hanlon makes – that Bush tried not talking to North Korea and it didn’t work, and he tried talking to Russia – and it didn’t work…suggesting that talking in and of itself may not be the absolute indicator of success in foreign policy…we get this Yglesias-worthy screed.<\/p>\n

Nice work, Spencer. Way to add to the national dialog about foreign policy.<\/p>\n

The overriding theme seems to be ad hominem attacks on O’Hanlon’s credibility; here’s Moira Whelan at Democracy Arsenal<\/a>:<\/p>\n

So what gives coming from this think tanker who has been a self proclaimed “war critic”?<\/p>\n

\nI have a theory…<\/p>\n

\nThink tanks in DC are traditionally known as refugee camps for the out-of-office team of foreign policy wonks. There\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s an expected turn over when new administrations come on as each team goes about grabbing “the best and the brightest” to fill their ranks.<\/p>\n

\nO\u00e2\u20ac\u2122Hanlon has by now gotten the message that he\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s burned his bridges with his Democratic friends. Those that like him personally even agree that he\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s radioactive right now thanks to his avid support of Bush\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s war strategy.<\/p>\n

\nSo what\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s a wonk to do?<\/p>\n

\nWell, one option is pre-positioning yourself for the future. By getting out there and going after the leading Democrats\u00e2\u20ac\u201dpeople that some of his closest colleagues are actively supporting…is he lining himself up to say that he was critiquing the next Administration before it was cool?<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Here’s the meat<\/strike> entirety<\/u> of her substantive critique:<\/p>\n

I\u00e2\u20ac\u2122d like to think that O\u00e2\u20ac\u2122Hanlon really is worried for our country and is pushing his ideas because they think they\u00e2\u20ac\u2122re better, but you sort of jump the shark as a foreign policy wonk when you question the concept of diplomacy as he’s done with Obama.<\/p>\n

\nIn some ways, O\u00e2\u20ac\u2122Hanlon\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s attacks on Obama could be an endorsement of sorts. He thinks Obama will win, so better get out there and criticize now so you can get invited to lots of lunches with Don Rumsfeld in the future.<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And, ever-substantive, here’s Big Media Matt<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Anyone who’s pissed O’Hanlon off this much is okay in my book. However, as the correspondent who brought this article to my attention observed, this seems like an odd time and place to go after Obama so severely if the intention is really to earn Clinton’s admiration. It looks in some ways more like pre-positioning for pro-McCain orientation in the general election.<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

It’s a mainstreaming of the old progblog stance – silence the opposition, because that’s so much easier than actually addressing anything that’s said.<\/p>\n

Here’s O’Hanlon’s piece in the WSJ<\/a>:<\/p>\n

A central element of Barack Obama’s plan to change American foreign policy is his intention, upon becoming president, to meet with foreign leaders of extremist regimes — the type of rogue-state dictators that George W. Bush has generally shunned during his time as president.<\/p>\n

\nApplied categorically, this would be a bad idea. Meeting with enemy heads of state is neither as original as Mr. Obama implies, nor as promising as he claims. As a specific option for dealing with difficult regimes, it has potential merit on a case-by-case basis, and should always be considered — but only after a careful assessment of what the United States believes it can get out of such meetings and dialogues.<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Now I’m supporting Obama in the primaries, and I’ve argued before<\/a> for direct talks with Iran.<\/p>\n

But I’ll also suggest that O’Hanlon raises a key issue that we supporters of Obama shouldn’t ignore – much less try and shout down – which is that Obama says things which need a lot more explanation – things like this<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Throughout the Middle East, we must harness American power to reinvigorate American diplomacy. Tough-minded diplomacy, backed by the whole range of instruments of American power — political, economic, and military — could bring success even when dealing with long-standing adversaries such as Iran and Syria.<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

and<\/p>\n

I will join with our allies in insisting — not simply requesting — that Pakistan crack down on the Taliban, pursue Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants, and end its relationship with all terrorist groups. <\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

and<\/p>\n

There must be no safe haven for those who plot to kill Americans. To defeat al Qaeda, I will build a twenty-first-century military and twenty-first-century partnerships as strong as the anticommunist alliance that won the Cold War to stay on the offense everywhere from Djibouti to Kandahar.<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

and<\/p>\n

We must also consider using military force in circumstances beyond self-defense in order to provide for the common security that underpins global stability — to support friends, participate in stability and reconstruction operations, or confront mass atrocities. But when we do use force in situations other than self-defense, we should make every effort to garner the clear support and participation of others — as President George H. W. Bush did when we led the effort to oust Saddam Hussein from Kuwait in 1991. The consequences of forgetting that lesson in the context of the current conflict in Iraq have been grave.<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The problem that this faces, of course, is what happens when those who plot to kill Americans are given safe havens in countries that won’t let us come kill them; what happens if Syria is unwilling to yeild to diplomacy and the threat of war; if European allies are unwilling to stand up in combat in the Middle East?<\/p>\n

And the broader issue is to place these conflicts into some kind of intelligible framework – one that can be explained to the American people, in order to sustain their support (something Bush has consitently failed to do); explained to the allies we hope to convince to stand beside us; and explained to our enemies…<\/p>\n

I will say that if anyone can do it, Obama is likely to be that person. Now he just needs to do it. I’m hoping – and believing – he can. I wish I were certain…<\/p>\n

I am certain that the folks cited above need to look in the mirror and do a gutcheck on who, exactly, should be ashamed. <\/p>\n

Update: Corrected quote boundaries on Whelan quote.<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Here’s Spencer Ackerman: Hanlon went to Iraq, saw that the surge is teh awesomez0rs, and wrote an op-ed suggesting that he was anti-war until he saw the fruits of a successful strategy. Only…Hanlon wasn’t ever anti-war, and he was taken on a Potemkin tour of Iraq. The bloggers started ripping him to shreds, resulting in […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1638"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1638"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1638\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1638"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1638"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1638"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}