Geodog

Courage comes in all forms: John Brady Kiesling argues for Preserving America's Moral Capital

I went to hear John Brady Kiesling's talk at the Bechtel Auditorium at UC Berkeley tonight. It was a packed house, a few undergrads but mostly graduate students, professors, and Berkeley townspeople, filling up the chairs, sitting on the floor in front and in the aisles, and crowding around the doorways (I gather some of the undergraduates were out making their unhappiness with Bush's War known in a more traditional fashion.)

Kiesling, author of the now famous resignation letter, was given a standing ovation when he entered the hall. He gave a great talk (although the Q&A, below, had the juiciest one-liners). He said that while he wished he could say that he was happy to be a temporary celebrity and giving talks, he wasn't. He said that last night, when Bush started the war against Iraq, marked a turning point in our history. It is the first time that the United States has struck the first blow. The United States has also imposed its own unilateral judgment that Iraqi freedom from the oppressive regime of Saddam Hussein was worth killing Iraqis for. He said that while he prayed for a quick and bloodless victory by our troops, followed by a rapid physical reconstruction and establishment of democracy, he didn't think it was very likely.

He talked about his experiences since joining the Foreign Service in 1983. Then the United States had vast reservoirs of good will and moral capital. It was seen as strong in wealth and virtuous institutions, and as having avoided many of the vices of imperialism. It was truly the leader of the free world, and that leadership was willingly given to it. Recently, however the United States has been depleting that reservoir at an alarming rate, and not replenishing it, e.g. Kyoto, Test-Ban Treaty, ABM treaty, Trade liberalism, AIDs medicines for poorer countries, etc. Kiesling resigned his position as political officer in Athens because he personally found it intolerable to be defending Bush's policies. Plus, he felt that Bush owed it to the American people to have a real debate on the costs and benefits of his unilateralism, and that debate wasn't happening. He wanted a license to speak, and an audience to listen.

He talked about how much Greek and European perceptions of America have changed. In Greece, Bush is now called "Ruler of the Universe." It is not a complement. The Greeks and many Europeans have become afraid of us, and of what we might do. They believe that the current administration has come to the conclusion that it doesn't need allies, and that it has given up on the values of democracy and international cooperation. They fear that since 911, America has become like a wounded rogue elephant, trampling everything in its path. Kiesling said that he is sure that if the world's people had had a little more trust and faith in the United States, they might have been more willing to join our Iraq policy. The United States seems to have forgotten that most of its foreign policy goals are not attainable militarily.

Kiesling talked about the war, and how "the war that we see on our television screens is not the war that is happening," by which I presumed he meant that is was not true to what the Iraqi's are experiencing. He also said that he hoped the Iraqi people would not react the way that Americans would react to having their country invaded and occupied, but he feared they would. They are nationalists too. Also, "terrorism is the favorite weapon of the powerless." Making war on Iraq is going to increase, not reduce terrorism. He talked about how Bush's vision of democracy has absolutely no legitimacy in the Middle East. Whether you like it or not, the fact is that the Muslim perception of unconditional support by the United States for Israel's leadership, no matter what their policies are, has eliminated our moral authority and credibility in the Middle East. Kiesling was especially scathing about the theory advanced by some prominent neo-conservatives that "Arabs only respect power." He said, in my experience with Arabs, they have the same human nature as anyone else: "Fear breeds hatred, not love."

He concluded his talk on a determinedly optimistic note, saying that in his experience, Americans want to do good, and that the tide will turn. And in the past, when America has offered a positive vision to the world, the world has responded. And it will again.

The question and answer period was as interesting as the talk, and prompted the juiciest quotes. Kiesling is quick on his feet, and has that wry and dry Down East sense of humor. I didn't get it all written down, but here is a sample.

Q: Should Bush be tried as a war criminal?
A: International law is a very fragile entity, and it needs lots of work to acquire its own authority. So I don't think that's going to happen. However, in any reasonable view of the law, Bush's Iraq war would be illegal.

Q: You referred in your letter to a "systematic distortion of intelligence." What did you mean?
A: The primary distortion of intelligence was the linkage alleged between Iraq on one hand, and Al Qaeda and 911 on the other. There was no evidence for that, and telling people that the War on Iraq lessens the risk of terrorism is shameful. We have increased the risk of terrorism.

Q: What are the chance that after Iraq, Perle, Rumsfeld, Cheney et al. will go after Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia [for regular readers, three guesses as to who asked that question].
A: The problem with a doctrine of preventative war is that it doesn't have a logical stopping point. But if we did that, Europeans and others would see us as the new Mongols, like those who sacked Baghdad in 1258. They wouldn't be so stupid. [Pauses. Mutters, "I think."]

Q: Looking at the difference between how Iraq is treated and how North Korea is treated, will our policies encourage other countries to develop weapons of mass destruction?
A. There is now a very strong incentive, for any country with concerns about the United States, to develop nuclear weapons.

Q. Can you explain what Tony Blair was thinking?
A: No. But I'd guess that Blair is convinced that the United States, without help, is very dangerous. He thought he could steer US policy so as to keep the US engaged with Europe, as Margaret Thatcher did for Reagan. Instead, he got marched off the cliff.

Q: [didn't get]
A: As an example of soft power, Iran is probably the country that has the strongest hunger for getting closer to the United States, in large part due to the ties with the large Iranian expatriate community in Southern California.

Q: How do you expect Europe to react to the US going forward? Will they try to sanction the US?
A: No. The United States is much too powerful. Instead, there will be a passive aggressive approach anytime the US tries to get something done. It is going to be hard to convince anyone of the benefits of working with the U.S.

Q: What do you think motivated the Bush administration to make war on Iraq?
A: One of the reasons that I knew that it was time for me to leave the Foreign Service was that I understood better what was happening in Greece and Europe than I did in Washington and the United States. But I think it was domestic political considerations. Bush wanted to show that he had done something big, something massive, in response to 911. He hasn't had much so far. Plus, after 911, all hell broke loose in the federal bureaucracy. Suddenly, you could spend as much money as you wanted to on anything having to do with American security. But the war on terrorism is primarily an intelligence and law enforcement task. There isn't much role for the military. But the trough of money was too big, and the military knows how to get to the trough.

Q: [Asked in the Bechtel Building]. How about the companies that stand to get rich from post war contracts?
A: The vultures are not responsible for the dead cow.

After an hour and a half of talking, an obviously exhausted Kiesling stopped taking questions, got another standing ovation, then stood greeting the line of well-wishers.

I had been surprised when Kiesling, who apparently goes by J. Brady Kiesling, in true Eastern Establishment form, stepped up to the podium. He looked as though he had stepped out of a David Niven movie, or one of Laurence Durrell's wonderful diplomatic novels, Stiff Upper Lip,Esprit De Corps, or Sauve Qui Peut. Tall, slightly stooped, calm and precise in speech, with a dry wit, wearing round glasses, a tie and a navy blazer, he fit almost perfectly the usual caricature of a "striped-pants diplomat." All that was missing were a few gray hairs and a monocle. However, after listening to him, it was clear that he had the clear vision, moral fiber, and courage of that other striped-pants diplomat, the man who stood up to Senator McCarthy, Dean Acheson. Kiesling gave up his career, his colleagues, and a nearly vested pension to sound the alarm about the harm that Bush's policies are doing, and the danger they are putting us in. His resignation was a real loss for the State Department, and a real gain for the United States. At a time when we will be celebrating our military, it is good to be reminded that courage and moral clarity come in all sorts of packages.

There was a video camera there, so it is possible that The Goldman School of Public Policy or the World Affairs Council will stream the talk on the web. For those of you in Washington DC, Kiesling will be talking at Georgetown on Monday.

Posted by Geodog at March 21, 2003 12:54 AM | TrackBack