The above mentioned article by Dr. Thomas P.M. Barnett appeared in the February 2005 Esquire. While Esquire may not be your foreign policy magazine of choice, Dr. Barnett is for real. He is a clear headed, realpolitik, economic determinist with a neo-Wilsonian bent whose ideas have influenced many of the recent changes in the American military. He is best known for his killer PowerPoint shows and as the author of The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century. I found his prescription for Bush's (and our nation's) success very perceptive, if occasionally snarky. After a mere six months (a lifetime in the second term of a president), how is Bush doing by Dr. Barnett's standards?
Barnett lays down three keys: "Co-opt Iran, lock in China, and take down North Korea." Let the grading begin.
As Nixon went to China, Barnett asks Bush to achieve rapprochement with Iran. The Mullahs have proven economic failures and can't last long if properly handled. The deal he proposes is "You can have the bomb, and we'll take you off the Axis of Evil list, plus we'll re-establish diplomatic ties and open up trade. But in exchange, not only will you bail us out on Iraq first and foremost by ending your support of the insurgency, you'll also cut off your sponsorship of Hezbollah and other anti-Israeli terrorist groups, help us bully Syria out of Lebanon, finally recognize Israel, and join us in guaranteeing the deal on a permanent Palestinian state. You want to be recognized as the regional player of note. We're prepared to do that. But that's the price tag. Pay it now or get ready to rumble."
In the event, Bush has blustered and threatened Iran, pointedly saying "All options are on the table." Barnett warns against such saber rattling, noting that any military option would be a disaster even if militarily successful. Our trade with Iran remains limited to oil, which builds no close contacts or the social and economic freedom that can follow true integration into the world economy. Since the US offers only scolding and sticks, Iran is only too happy to assist the resistance to the American occupation of Iraq. Hezbollah remains strong, though the Syrians have mainly left Lebanon. It is likely that this is a byproduct of the "big bang" of the invasion of Iraq, but it was not because Iran wanted it to happen. Iran will recognize Israel when pigs fly and are made the national symbol of both countries. We have not recognized Iran as a major regional player, but they are one anyway and it has strengthened the hands of the religious conservatives there. Well, at least he hasn't invaded them. GRADE: D
China is exploring the concept of "Peaceful Rising," as opposed to the relatively unpeaceful rising of the United States and the absolutely unpeaceful rising of Germany and Japan. Barnett suggests we do all we can to encourage them. "Take America's defense guarantee to Taiwan off the table and do it now, before some irrational politician in Taipei decides he's ready to start a war between two nuclear powers.…Let's lock in a strategic alliance with rising China at today's prices, because it's got nowhere to go but up over the coming years." This is a tough sell, since both countries' militaries are eager for a near peer competitor to justify spending programs.
As Barnett himself has pointed out elsewhere, the Bush administration is pursuing dual tracks (the economic separate from the military/political). As the Chinese do not see a separation, all they see is inconsistency and confusion. Irrational politicians in Taipei remain eager for provocation. By leaving the threat of nuclear war on the table, Bush risks having America's options determined by local Taiwanese politics. To his credit, he has not totally alienated the Chinese. Success is still possible; he just has not taken any action to make it likely. Since Barnett calls for buying in at today's prices, this lack of action does not score well. GRADE: C-
The solution to North Korea is easy; "make Kim an offer he can't refuse." Since Team America is unavailable, Barnett proposes a coalition of China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand, plus Russia. All have reason to want Kim gone. All could be brought together to make it clear to Kim that an honorable retirement is preferable to what will happen to Saddam or what did happen to his sons.
Unfortunately for Bush's grade, this is the second half of a two-part question. The U.S. needs China to take Kim down. Without Chinese agreement, anything more than threats, talk and more scolding are out of the question. Kim is secure because he has WMD and we only invade countries that we know don't have them. He continues to export drugs, counterfeit currency and weapons with no consequences to himself. His countrymen starve, but he will resist us to his last gulag serf. There is every expectation that Kim will rule North Korea when Bush is a former president. GRADE: D
Iraq: The Elephant in the Room
It is interesting that Dr. Barnett did not list Iraq as a make or break issue for Bush. Barnett sees the invasion of Iraq through the optimistic lens evident in his work . Like most Americans, he was confident that the invasion would bring better days to Iraq. Better days for Barnett primarily mean better economic conditions, more trade, more connection to the world economy. Flows of people, foreign direct investment and energy are the metrics. The rise of political freedom usually follows, not precedes these, with China and the New Core countries as exemplars..
Almost every point in The Pentagon's New Map concerning the importance of the follow-on force to winning to peace was ignore by the Bush administration. Far from being the "source code" for the administration, Barnett's work stands in sharp contrast to what Bush has wrought. Foreign direct investment was actively discouraged post-invasion, with the spoils of war being limited to American companies. Little thought was given to providing security, the sine non qua of economic development. Rumsfeld gloried in winning the war with a small takedown force while distaining the need for enough troops to prevent the chaos that led to the insurgency. Basic economic and military rulesets were ignored at great cost. Grading the invasion and occupation of Iraq by the standards of Dr. Barnett's books is beyond the scope of this article. It is true that America has had the opportunity to learn many valuable lessons, much as a team that loses its first game of the year, but there are no firm indications that the proper lessons have been learned or that they will be implemented by those at the top.