[Mb-civic] Rumsfeld's War On 'Insurgents' - Dana Milbank - Washington Post Op-Ed

[William Swiggard]

Rumsfeld's War On 'Insurgents'

By Dana Milbank
Wednesday, November 30, 2005; A18

Last weekend, while other Americans were watching football and eating 
leftover turkey, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld ended the Iraqi 
insurgency.

It was easy, really: He declared that the insurgents would, henceforth, 
no longer be called insurgents.

"Over the weekend, I thought to myself, 'You know, that gives them a 
greater legitimacy than they seem to merit,' " Rumsfeld, at a Pentagon 
briefing yesterday, said of his ban on the I-word. "It was an epiphany," 
he added, throwing his hands in the air.

Encouraging reporters to consult their dictionaries, the defense 
secretary said: "These people aren't trying to promote something other 
than disorder, and to take over that country and turn it into a 
caliphate and then spread it around the world. This is a group of people 
who don't merit the word 'insurgency,' I think."

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace, standing at Rumsfeld's 
side, evidently didn't get the memo about the wording change. Describing 
combat in Iraq, he paused and said, "I have to use the word 'insurgent' 
because I can't think of a better word right now."

" 'Enemies of the legitimate Iraqi government' -- how's that?" Rumsfeld 
proposed.

"What the secretary said," Pace continued, to laughter. But Rumsfeld's 
new description -- ELIG, if you prefer an acronym -- didn't stick with 
the general. Smiling, he uttered the forbidden word again while 
discussing explosive devices.

The secretary recoiled in mock horror. "Sorry, sir," Pace explained. 
"I'm not trainable today."

It was not the first time the defense secretary sought to reorder the 
world according to his tastes. Also not for the first time, the world 
wasn't following his plan. This summer Rumsfeld tried to change the "war 
on terror" to the "global struggle against violent extremism," or GSAVE. 
President Bush ended that plan.

This time, it's the Joint Chiefs chairman, still new to the job, who 
isn't marching to Rumsfeld's orders.

When UPI's Pam Hess asked about torture by Iraqi authorities, Rumsfeld 
replied that "obviously, the United States does not have a 
responsibility" other than to voice disapproval.

But Pace had a different view. "It is the absolute responsibility of 
every U.S. service member, if they see inhumane treatment being 
conducted, to intervene, to stop it," the general said.

Rumsfeld interjected: "I don't think you mean they have an obligation to 
physically stop it; it's to report it."

But Pace meant what he said. "If they are physically present when 
inhumane treatment is taking place, sir, they have an obligation to try 
to stop it," he said, firmly.

Rumsfeld was defense secretary in 2003 when the United States invaded 
Iraq, and he has remained in that job for the occupation of the past 32 
months. But in his briefing yesterday, he at times sounded as if he were 
merely observing the Iraq war on television.

On a question about banning white phosphorous on the battlefield, 
Rumsfeld turned to his briefing partner and asked, "General Pace?"

Asked how widespread the abuse in Iraq was, he replied: "I am not going 
to be judging it from 4,000 miles away." Asked about the "uneven 
performance" of Iraqi police, Rumsfeld pointed out that the police until 
recently "had been reporting up through the Department of State."

Reuters's Charlie Aldinger asked about "uniformed death squads" in Iraq. 
Rumsfeld replied: "I'm not going to comment on hypothetical questions."

When Aldinger protested that the question was not hypothetical, Rumsfeld 
replied that Iraq is "a sovereign country" and suggested the death-squad 
allegations could be politically motivated. "I just don't know," he 
said. "I can only talk about what I know." With an exaggerated shrug, he 
added: "That's life."

If such deflections did not make things clear enough, the secretary 
spelled out his philosophy of responsibility in a podium-thumping soliloquy.

"We have an orientation that tends to make us think that everything is 
our responsibility and that we should be doing this," he said. "It is 
the Iraqis' country, 28 million of them. They are perfectly capable of 
running that country. . . . Our problem is that anytime something needs 
to be done, we have a feeling we should rush in and fill the vacuum and 
do it ourselves."

Fortunately for the Iraqis, things are going well there, in Rumsfeld's 
view. He rattled off a series of improving statistics -- "seven 
operational divisions and 31 operational brigade headquarters"-- 
accompanied by a collection of favorable descriptions: "Largely peaceful 
. . . liberating and securing . . . solid progress . . . positive . . . 
a darn good job."

"The strategy is working, and we should stick to it," Rumsfeld judged.

Particularly now that the insurgents have become ELIGs.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/29/AR2005112901405.html?nav=hcmodule
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20051130/4e3257ae/attachment.htm