Lawrence Kaplan has a good article on the successes of the Bush foreign policy at TNR today. The article I think is the fairest account yet of the successes that this administration has been a part of. From the article:
Both arguments reflect what Georgetown University’s Robert Lieber calls a reductio ad Iraqum, in which every accomplishment or setback of U.S. foreign policy traces back to Iraq. Neither version of events fares well under scrutiny. When democracy blossoms in several different places at once in a region whose political culture hasn’t budged in 60 years, it’s illogical to credit internal forces alone. At the same time, crediting the inspirational effect of Iraq’s elections with events in places as far-flung as Ukraine and Egypt goes too far–and, in slighting the U.S. role as an agent of democracy in every one of them, not far enough.
The best thing about this article is that it covers some of the non-Iraq foreign policy initiatives, detailing the actions that actually followed the democracy rhetoric we hear from Bush all the time. Of course, I end up finishing the article and wonder why we couldn’t have done the same thing in Iraq? This war has become a process that will take decades to finish and in the process has put us in bed with folks like Karimov (see here or here or here). It still doesn’t seem necessary to me, this war… not even the cogent supporters of Bush have convinced me yet.
The foreign policy successes show what can happen with money, diplomacy, and opportunity… no war necessary.