The Next War

It's always looming. But has our military learned the right lessons from this one to fight it and win?

By Wesley K. Clark

Washington Post | Sunday, September 16, 2007; B01

Testifying before Congress last week, Gen. David H. Petraeus appeared commanding, smart and alive to the challenges that his soldiers face in Iraq. But he also embodied what the Iraq conflict has come to represent: an embattled, able, courageous military at war, struggling to maintain its authority and credibility after 4 1/2 years of a "cakewalk" gone wrong.

Petraeus will not be the last general to find himself explaining how a military intervention has misfired and urging skeptical lawmakers to believe that the mission can still be accomplished. For the next war is always looming, and so is the urgent question of whether the U.S. military can adapt in time to win it.

Today, the most likely next conflict will be with Iran, a radical state that America has tried to isolate for almost 30 years and that now threatens to further destabilize the Middle East through its expansionist aims, backing of terrorist proxies such as the Lebanese group Hezbollah and Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank, and far-reaching support for radical Shiite militias in Iraq. As Iran seems to draw closer to acquiring nuclear weapons, almost every U.S. leader -- and would-be president -- has said that it simply won't be permitted to reach that goal.

Think another war can't happen? Think again. Unchastened by the Iraq fiasco, hawks in Vice President Cheney's office have been pushing the use of force. It isn't hard to foresee the range of military options that policymakers face.

General Clark: "It's time to withdraw, we need politics and diplomacy."

Corriere della Sera | 9/11/2007

Washington—For the last few weeks General Clark, ex-commander of NATO, winner of the Balkan War, has led a campaign against the war in Iraq. Clark, who is not running for president as he did in 2004, but who might be part of a Democrat government should the Republicans lose the elections in 2008, accuses Bush of "hiding behind the generals" and exhorts congress to confront him. In his speeches he warns that the war in Iraq is a failure, that it has exacerbated the problems in the Middle East and damaged America's image in the world.

What do you think of Petraeus' report?

I know Petraeus, he is a good general and some military progress may have occurred in Iraq. But it is tactical progress, and I don't think it's enough because you can't win just by fighting and silencing the opposition. We need to stop discussing tactics and soldiers and shift the debate on to President Bush's strategies and policies, not just in Iraq but in the whole region.

Whose job is that?

Congress. They need to tell President Bush clearly that it's not Petraeus who is under scrutiny, but him. They have to ask him to forge a strategic regional plan and warn him that if he doesn't they will cut funding for the war in Iraq and will adopt other measures. The administration doesn't want to hear it but even moderate Republicans are beginning to protest.

On September 8, 2007 General Wesley Clark delivered the keynote speech at the International Institute of Counter-Terrorism (ICT) 7th International Conference: An Annual Gathering of the Counter Terrorism Community

September 8-11, 2007
“Terrorism’s Global Impact”
Herzliya, Israel

Thank you for that kind introduction. What a pleasure to be with you here this evening. Every time I return here, I am overwhelmed by the physical beauty, and in awe of the spirit and the courage and the energy of the Israeli people.

My first visit was in 1976, as a member of a White House team working foreign assistance in the region. We met with your Prime Minister, Itzak Rabin, and sat around his dinner table until well after midnight discussing the region, and all that had transpired, 1948, 56, 67, 73- with him and some of his cabinet. Afterward, we walked the walls around Jerusalem, ending up at the Wailing Wall at 4 AM. Jerusalem was bathed in the orange glow of newly installed sodium vapor lights, and basking in peace. And to a young Army officer, this was just an emotional, really overpowering experience.

I've been back many times, and dealt with the issues of the region in many roles during my military service, from sharing training techniques with IDF officers visiting my command in the California desert to, in my last capacity, as Commander-in-Chief of the US European Command, and helping work Israel's security needs with Amnon Lipkin-Shahak and Shaul Mofaz and others.

And so it was with particular concern that I watched from afar as intense diplomacy in Maryland gave way to strife and open conflict - just as Shaul Mofaz had warned me it would when we conferred on my last visit in the spring of 2000 - and the terrible tragedy of suicide bombing after suicide bombing returned again, vicious attacks against innocent civilians, meant to terrorize and demoralize. And like every American, I took heart in Israel's courage, and pride in Israel's strength, and tried to understand and learn from Israel's experiences.

Today Israel has proved once again its mettle in a tempestuous region, but both continuing and new challenges are growing.

Segment 1 | Quicktime| Windows Media Segment 2 | Quicktime| Windows Media Segment 3 | Quicktime| Windows Media

General Wesley Clark on MSNBC News Live

June 16, 2007
Transcription by Melange

Segment 1

Alex Witt: Mideast turmoil, the crisis deepening today as the struggle moves to the West Bank where Fatah gunmen are sweeping into Hamas cold institutions, controlled rather. They're taking them over by force. With me now, MSNBC analyst, Retired US Army General Wesley Clark. General, good morning to you, sir.

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Good morning, Alex.

Alex Witt: So is it fair to say that we are now seeing the emergence of two separate Palestinian states? Is that how you read it?

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: That is how I read it. I think that Hamas has a…apparently a very very strong grip on Gaza and uh, Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the United States, the west, the Saudis…no one quite knows how to crack this grip because there's one and a quarter million people living in Gaza and so you can't starve them out, you can't blockade them out, you create a humanitarian crisis and the concern is that Gaza is going to become a hotbed of al Qaeda-like radicalism.

Alex Witt: Um, General, before we look ahead to the next step, I'm curious. How did we get to this point in the first place? Is this simply the inevitable result of those surprise elections when Hamas took power of Parliament or do you think this could have been avoided?

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: Well I think it's the consequence of a long-term struggle within the Islamic world and particularly within the Palestinian groups between a Yasser Arafat-led, corrupt, relatively more moderate organization that might have been prepared to concede the existence of Israel and harder-line, more Islamic organizations. So it's the outcome of a long…years long, struggle going back before the early 90's into the late 80's. Um, it's been financed by Iran. So this is not a rapid emergence. The elections were a consequence of this long struggle and this struggle is going to continue.

General Wesley Clark on MSNBC
June 13, 2007
transcript by Reg NYC

(joined in progress...)

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: ...Almost a year ago, and they've tried to stay out of the fighting in Gaza. But as they are shelled and, and rocketed from Gaza, then they do retaliate against the leaders who are directing that shelling. As this fighting worsens of course, it's going to create a humanitarian catastrophe. The Israeli Prime Minister has called for a blockade of Gaza to keep weapons from getting in. The Fata people there claim that they're being out-gunned, that their leader's not present. So, it's a, this is a, a, approaching a possible climatic moment in the struggle between the radicals and the more radical element among the Palestinians.

Alex Witt: And, General, with regard - in addition to those humanitarian concerns - what would it mean, say politically, if there was an all-out civil war in Gaza? Would be, would there be any chance to getting back on the roadmap to peace?

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: I think it would be very difficult for anybody on the outside to intervene effectively in the war. I think it'd be very difficult, for example, for the Israelis to intervene on behalf of Fata. Right now, it appears that Hamas has the upper hand. This could change, but right now what this would mean is a government taking power which is more absolutist in its view, rejectionist in it's review of Israel's right to exist as a state, and it would compromise even further the chances for peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

Alex Witt: Alright. Retired General Wesley Clark, former Presidential candidate, now MSNBC analyst. It's all good. Thank you so much for joining us.

Click here to leave your comments and read the transcript

Bush's Iran Policy Hurts Israel

March 29, 2007

Last Friday, Iranian military forces seized 15 British sailors and marines in the Persian Gulf. Some believe this is an act of aggression by Iran and should be met with a commensurate military response.

I do not.

I believe it shows that the Bush Administration's current policy with Iran is not working. For sake of stability in the Middle East, it's time for direct diplomacy with Iran -- now more than ever.

Today, we're launching our third video blog for StopIranWar.com. I'm joined by Iraq war veteran Jon Soltz of VoteVets.org and Clark Community blogger Reg to discuss how President Bush's get tough policy with Iran is undermining the security of our most reliable ally in the region, Israel.

Watch today's video blog to understand why George Bush's policy of confronting Iran hurts the Israelis, our strongest allies in this volatile region.

We need to be shaping a new vision for the Middle East. Peace won't come through saber rattling and threats -- it will come through dialogue, negotiation and the hard work of diplomacy. While I would never rule out military action against Iran if necessary to preserve stability, protect Israel and defend America's national security, it just doesn't make sense in our current circumstances.

In fact, attacking Iran now would simply derail the Middle East peace process, further radicalize Israel's enemies, and put our friend and ally at risk. Years of diplomacy aimed at laying the groundwork for peace will be lost.

We must give the people of this region cause for hope -- not just the threat of the Sixth Fleet lurking off their shore. It's time to let the diplomats do their job.

Watch our new video blog today, and then sign our petition to President Bush asking him to pursue diplomacy with Iran -- not more military confrontation.

It's time for the United States to be a beacon of hope and the voice of reason in the Middle East. President Bush's policy of military confrontation has done enough harm. Please, help me change his course by inviting your friends and family to sign our petition at StopIranWar.com today.

Sincerely,

Wes Clark