Accountability at Last

Poll after poll before the midterm elections last week asked Americans one question: Which issue is most important to you in deciding your Congressional votes? In the majority of those polls, significant proportions of voters cited Iraq as their single most pressing concern. When the Democrats gained control of both the House and Senate for the first time since 1994, the electorate sent an unambiguous message that they were furious with the Bush administration’s failed foreign policy and handling of Iraq.

Former Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld’s resignation on Nov. 8, however, marks a step in the right direction. With estimates as high as 650,000 Iraqi deaths since the war began in 2003, Rumsfeld’s hubristic view of himself in the Department of Defense (DoD) as omnipotent military orchestrator has led to nothing short of disaster. A war games simulation in 1999 suggested that more than 400,000 ground troops would be required in order to maintain stability in a post-invasion Iraq, but only about one-third of that number is there now.

After the 1991 Gulf War, then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin L. Powell outlined a strategy for effective military action in what is now known as the “Powell Doctrine.” He emphasized using “overwhelming force” to subdue any U.S. enemy, with “broad international support” and a “clear exit strategy.” But Rumsfeld ignored years of conventional wisdom by acting under the assumption that advances in military technology can replace a multilateral coalition of real troops and well-delineated contingency plans. In doing so, he essentially used Iraq, a nation of 26 million people, as a laboratorial experiment to corroborate his warped military visions.

Rumsfeld’s temperament and authoritarian style of leadership have also aroused the ire of eight retired generals (who had already called for his resignation in early 2006), the “Army Times” along with three other papers with a military readership, and numerous politicians from both major parties. Almost all his critics point to his arrogance, his refusal to acknowledge his mistakes, his lack of respect for the armed forces, and his officious inclination towards military micromanagement. Former Army Chief of Staff Eric K. Shinseki, the one lone voice in the DoD who had dared to challenge Rumsfeld’s theory of “light warfare,” was humiliated in public and had his successor named a year in advance of his retirement as punishment.

Rumsfeld has also exhibited a frightening disregard for human rights and international law, sanctioning the torture and degradation of numerous prisoners of war in direct violation of the Geneva Conventions. Sexual humiliation, waterboarding, and the use of dogs were but a few of the innumerable cruel crimes perpetrated by the U.S. military at the Abu Ghraib prison and Guantanamo Bay detainment camps. The alleged subsequent cover-up within the DoD only further betrayed Rumsfeld’s authorization of and apathy towards the brutal mistreatment of foreign fugitives.

For all of these reasons, Rumsfeld has been met with universal revile and bears almost singular responsibility for the U.S.’s continuing decline in international clout. We are relieved to see his resignation as the first sign of accountability in the Bush administration, and we can only hope that his successor, former CIA chief Robert M. Gates, will serve with an open mind and salvage what remains of Iraq and the credibility of our nation. Thrice before have we called for Rumsfeld’s resignation, and it’s about time. Amen.