This May Become an All-Chalabi Blog
Josh Marshall again, linking to Salon(requires registration or watching an ad).
The Marc Zell quote, indicating that at least some neo-cons who believed in Chalabi are now thoroughly disenchanted, is fun in itself. (Quoted by Marshall and by Alterman). This, however, is (I think) the best part:
"The upshot of the piece is that Chalabi's neocon supporters are beginning to realize that he is every bit the huckster and fraud that his most unyielding enemies at State and CIA said he was. He lured them in with all manner of improbable claims about the pain-free peace he'd make with Israel, how he'd upend Arab nationalism and generally make all the intractable conundrums of the region disappear."
"In the popular political imagination we're familiar with the neocons as conniving militarists, masters of intrigue and cabals, graspers for the oil supplies of the world, and all the rest. But here we have them in what I suspect is the truest light: as college kid rubes who head out for a weekend in Vegas, get scammed out of their money by a two-bit hustler on the first night and then get played for fools by a couple hookers who leave them naked and handcuffed to their hotel beds."
I was suggesting that Rumsfeld planted his story with Barbara Lerner, and then the Rumsfeld and Cheney group more collectively won praise from David Frum. In both cases, Chalabi is the misunderstood hero. The new story suggests that the great debate in the Bush administration about Chalabi is not between Defence and State, or neo-cons and nons, but between those neo-cons who still buy the dream, and those who don't.
Of course, it is still possible that Rumsfeld is fundamentally preparing to write his memoirs, blaming "those bastards" whoever they are. He doesn't need any suggestions for a ghost writer or co-author--Frum would be an excellent choice--but I would like to suggest a motto: "Sometimes people who are free do bad things."
There's got to be at least one great book on this. Chalabi lobbies Washington for a decade: invade my country. You'll build something that has never existed before: an Arab state that is pro-Israel and pro-Western! A democracy, even, while we're at it! Why not? Incredibly, a president is elected who seems to buy it all--especially after 9/11.
Of course, it is possible that Bush can say with a clear conscience that he was never talked into anything by neo-cons (it's hard to resist an LBJ or Spiro Agnew phrase, "pointy-headed intellectual" neo-cons). He came to Washington with his own convictions, and his own reasons for wanting to replace Saddam with a democracy. More generally, it is possible that Bush can say with a clear conscience that he has never been thoroughly briefed about anything--or if he has been, he has forgotten.
Still, it looks like Chalabi is the most successful Washington lobbyist in history. He actually got 200,000 U.S. troops carrying out regime change in his country, on the basis of research and planning that can hardly even be called paltry. Basically, research and planning seem to have consisted of "trust Chalabi." The Cuban emigres only dream of having this kind of influence.
What about a wider historical perspective. What exactly was Chalabi's role in Iran-Contra in the 80s? He "suddenly" seems friendly with the mullahs in Iran; yet in Iran-Contra he promised Ollie North and the others that he would take some kind of bold action on behalf of pro-Western, etc. moderates against the mullahs. Was it all lies? Is he always simply going for the best deal at the moment? Yet he has shown himself a prodigy of long-term planning--more so than certain high-ranking government officials we could name.
Very recent posts on Barbara Lerner, David Frum, the neo-cons and Chalabi: here here and here.
Earlier Chalabi posts here and here.
|
