Gerard Baker, the Times of London columnist, repeats in the 13 April edition the speculation that neoconservatism has fallen. As a label, he may be right. But the ideas it represents? Not likely.
The Iraq study group will report their findings shortly. Since the noise about the bipartisan commission began last summer, the media have described the study group’s co-chair, former Secretary of State Jim Baker, as a “realist,” a practical man, an operator’s operator who’s always got a plan. The implication is that realism equals an exit strategy, a way out, a change in policy that would withdraw US forces.
Ted Koppel returned from a recent visit to Tehran where, he reports, he was the subject of a credit card scam. Oddly, he came back eager to be deceived by the Iranian government too. He proposes on the NY Times op-ed pages on 2 October that the U.S. stop trying to keep Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Instead, he says, we should tell the Iranian mullahs that if a “dirty bomb explodes in Milwaukee, or some other nuclear device detonates in Baltimore or Wichita, if Israel or Egypt or Saudi Arabia should fall victim to a ‘nuclear accident,’…the U.S. will not search around for the perpetrator. The return address will be predetermined, and it will be somewhere in Iran.”
