Seriously divided GOP
December 12th 2006 08:27
It is official! There is a serious schism in the Republican Party. No, it's not just the New York Times gleefully pouncing upon even smallest signs of disgareement and blowing up it into a major rift. I think this time its serious. The publication of ISG report confirms it what we've been suspecting for a long time. There is a serious schism in the GOP.
This sort of thing is supposed to be Democratic Party's thing, isn't it? Weren't Democrats the fractious-ridden party famous for not being able to agree on anything? Wasn't GOP always so smug about projecting its unity? Weren't they supposed to be the patriotic party which put country above everyt other interest?So, what's happening? Why should defeat in a mere by-election bring down the whole stoic edifice?
The emergence of realists has not happened smoothly. This was perhaps the ugliest turf war seen in modern political history, infinitely worse than the turf wars between the State Department or the Pentagon, FBI or the CIA, much much worse. Not only they had marked the "neocons", but they have hunted them down one by one till Bush doesn't have even a single neo-con left except perhaps Dick Cheney. As if the induction of Bob Gates, the influence of Condoleezza Rice were not eough, we have to endure this James Baker theatre.
Earlier, it used to be Iraq war was not just about Iraq. Now, Iraq war is almost certainly not about Iraq. When we say realist or neocon we have to remember that there are powerful orthodoxies behind each one of these terms, none of which would like to lose power to the other gang. Hence the bloodbath. When James Baker says that victory is not an option in Iraq, he means that if Iraq were victorious that would also mean victory for neocons at home and the loss of their own turf, pehaps forever. Hence, victory is not an option. Forget how disastrous it might be for America and its allies, for Iraq itself, for rest of the world. They want their turf back and they will seize the ongoing situation in Iraq, spin it anyway possible and pull the rug under their opponent's feet and get your turf back.
This sort of thing is expected from the Democrats. After all, their single-point Bush hatred is actually a grab for power. Bush went to war on exaxtly the same premises they have been using for years. Iraq has to be defeated because Bush has to be defeated. Bush has to be defeated because they were out of power and have to get it at any cost. Not by offering a better alternative but by nuking the incumbent.
This sort of thing is expected from the Democrats. But, when GOP does the same thing, it shocks. Granted there were always a friction between paleocons and neocons. But what makes this latest outbreak fo realism different and much worse is the fact the realists haven't re-emerged innocently but only after waging a relentless campaign of leaks and subterfuge.
And yes, the democrats are sitting back and enjoying the spectacle GOP fighting among themselves and destroying each other. Whether or America wins or loses, Bush is toast. What do they care, if this will jeopardise entire regions for years to come?
GOP lost because many conservatives had the brilliant idea of sitting at home to teach the party a lesson, confident they will be taking back the White House. But, if this realist recipe for disaster is followed through, they can kiss 2008 goodbye just now. Who has taught a lesson to whom/
One cannot but use Matthew Arnold's prophetic words in Dover Beach,
Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain;
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.
This sort of thing is supposed to be Democratic Party's thing, isn't it? Weren't Democrats the fractious-ridden party famous for not being able to agree on anything? Wasn't GOP always so smug about projecting its unity? Weren't they supposed to be the patriotic party which put country above everyt other interest?So, what's happening? Why should defeat in a mere by-election bring down the whole stoic edifice?
The emergence of realists has not happened smoothly. This was perhaps the ugliest turf war seen in modern political history, infinitely worse than the turf wars between the State Department or the Pentagon, FBI or the CIA, much much worse. Not only they had marked the "neocons", but they have hunted them down one by one till Bush doesn't have even a single neo-con left except perhaps Dick Cheney. As if the induction of Bob Gates, the influence of Condoleezza Rice were not eough, we have to endure this James Baker theatre.
Earlier, it used to be Iraq war was not just about Iraq. Now, Iraq war is almost certainly not about Iraq. When we say realist or neocon we have to remember that there are powerful orthodoxies behind each one of these terms, none of which would like to lose power to the other gang. Hence the bloodbath. When James Baker says that victory is not an option in Iraq, he means that if Iraq were victorious that would also mean victory for neocons at home and the loss of their own turf, pehaps forever. Hence, victory is not an option. Forget how disastrous it might be for America and its allies, for Iraq itself, for rest of the world. They want their turf back and they will seize the ongoing situation in Iraq, spin it anyway possible and pull the rug under their opponent's feet and get your turf back.
This sort of thing is expected from the Democrats. After all, their single-point Bush hatred is actually a grab for power. Bush went to war on exaxtly the same premises they have been using for years. Iraq has to be defeated because Bush has to be defeated. Bush has to be defeated because they were out of power and have to get it at any cost. Not by offering a better alternative but by nuking the incumbent.
This sort of thing is expected from the Democrats. But, when GOP does the same thing, it shocks. Granted there were always a friction between paleocons and neocons. But what makes this latest outbreak fo realism different and much worse is the fact the realists haven't re-emerged innocently but only after waging a relentless campaign of leaks and subterfuge.
And yes, the democrats are sitting back and enjoying the spectacle GOP fighting among themselves and destroying each other. Whether or America wins or loses, Bush is toast. What do they care, if this will jeopardise entire regions for years to come?
GOP lost because many conservatives had the brilliant idea of sitting at home to teach the party a lesson, confident they will be taking back the White House. But, if this realist recipe for disaster is followed through, they can kiss 2008 goodbye just now. Who has taught a lesson to whom/
One cannot but use Matthew Arnold's prophetic words in Dover Beach,
Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain;
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.
| 67 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
