Developing a new consensus on Iraq

Re “Still ‘the decider,’ ” Opinion, Nov. 9

Dramatic changes on Capitol Hill are not likely to lead to restoration of “centrism, moderation and pragmatism” in U.S. foreign policy. It is true that foreign policy was the crucial issue in the election. The Democrats rode to power on a wave of public discontent toward the war in Iraq.

Now Democratic leaders must scramble to build a consensus around a new Iraq policy that can attract broad public support. Democrats can entertain competing proposals for ending the U.S. military presence in Iraq by a certain date. The debate will include what measures can be taken to avert the worst-case scenarios that could ensue on our departure, with an emphasis on limiting the damage to U.S. interests and security.

If the Democrats are willing to get behind an exit strategy and rally nervous Republicans, they may yet succeed. If they fail, and if President Bush stands fast or sends even more troops into the conflict, they will at least have succeeded in bringing the distinctions between the two parties into sharper focus.

CHRIS PREBLE

Washington

The writer is the director of foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute.

*

Bush may have been making conciliatory remarks in the aftermath of his electoral “thumping,” but as long as he continues to insist that Democrats must work with him to achieve his oft-stated goals in Iraq, he is due for more disappointment. His central problem -- one that has eluded everyone in his neocon sphere of influence -- is that there is no more hope for finding a “victory” in Iraq than there was for finding weapons of mass destruction. In both cases, his initial premise was flawed, and no amount of moving the goal posts will hide the fact that this was a defeat from the moment Bush decided that Iraq should be invaded.

JEFF BLYTH

Glendale