http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0112/dailyUpdate.html?s=mets

Neocons: Don't stop now

New book urges Bush to push regime change, keep an eye on US Muslims,
and not to create Palestinian state

By Tom Regan | csmonitor.com

Neoconservatives Richard Perle and David Frum don't want the US to
back down from its aggressive positions in the war on terror. Not now.

As President Bush turns more towards diplomacy to deal with
international problems (the chosen path of one of Mr. Frum's and Mr.
Perle's least favorite people, Secretary of State Colin Powell), the
authors see this as a mistake.

In their new book, an "An end to evil: How to win the war on terror,"
the two men argue, among many other things:

* France is really more an enemy than an ally of the US and that
European nations must be forced to choose between Paris and
Washington

* Muslims living in the US must be given special scrutiny by US law
enforcement and other Americans

* The US must overthrow the regimes in Iran and Syria, and impose a
blockade on North Korea

* Palestinians must not be allowed to have a state

* All Americans must carry a government issued identity card

* The US must explicitly reject the jurisdiction of the United
Nations Charter.

The two authors are both fellows at the American Enterprise Institute
and former members of the Bush administration who left within the past
year. CNN reports that Perle resigned last March from his position as
chairman of the Pentagon's civilian advisor Defense Policy Board over
charges that he stood to profit from the war in Iraq because of his
acceptance of consultant fees from telecommunications Global Crossing.
He continues to serve as a member of the DPB. IndyMedia reports that
Frum left his position as White House speech writer after someone
leaked the news that he was the one who came up with the phrase "axis
of evil."

Empire builders: Neoconservatives and their blueprint for US power

Perle and Frum call their book a "manual for victory." The Jewish
Forward says the book provides succeeds in "providing what some
political observers describe as the most comprehensive and coherent
summary of the core positions held by various neoconservative camps in
the wake of the Iraq invasion." But the Forward says it also shows the
deepening rift and battle for control of White House policy between
pro-interventionist neoconservatives and old-line conservatives

"We were with them on Iraq," said Helle Dale, a foreign policy
analyst at the Heritage Foundation, an old-line conservative
think-tank in Washington. "But if you have any sense of military
constraints, you would know further calls to military action right
now are a little ill-timed."

The book has generated much debate. In a review in The Washington
Post, New Republic Senior Editor Lawrence Kaplan (former executive
editor of The National Interest, the foreign policy journal published
by Irving Kristol, the man referred to as the "godfather of
neoconservatives") says bears reading "less for its grace as a polemic
than for its value as a primer on how those hawks view the world
around them," and that the arguments put forth by Perle and Frum, make
them the "the heirs and custodians" of President Woodrow Wilson's
"crusading" foreign policy style.

When not ridiculing the backwardness of Islamic societies, they
champion an effort "to lead the Arab and Muslim world to democracy
and liberty"and make the case for enshrining women's freedom at the
center of official policy. An End to Evil shares the traditionally
conservative view of the world as a fundamentally dangerous and
Hobbesian place. But it also argues that the condition can be
ameliorated - through the vigorous application of American power
and ideals. This is not conservatism. It is liberalism, with very
sharp teeth.

Syndicatecd columnist Cal Thomas, in a piece about Iran, says Perle
and Frum's advice on how to bring about regime change in Iran
(basically, no more Mr. Nice Guy) is right on the money.

The United States has two options. It can fail to follow through on
its initial blow in Iraq, thus empowering and encouraging America's
enemies everywhere, or it can deal a knockout blow to terrorism by
finishing the job. As we saw with the Soviet Union, resolve is
often enough to achieve American objectives. As long as American
diplomats think humanitarian aid and political niceties by people
dressed in Western business clothes will lessen the threat against
us, we will continue to be threatened.

The book also has its critics. Jim Lobe of Inter Press New Service (a
long time critic of neoconservative philosophy) writes that if Perle
and Frum have their way, the US would be issuing ultimatums on a daily
basis. Mr. Lobe, while acknowledging the book must be taken seriously
because of who wrote it (particularly Perle), he also says it contains
many errors and omissions, and seems determined not to take
responsibility for the fact that Iraq might not have worked out the
way they first envisioned it would.

Perle and Frum naturally blame the State Department, the Central
Intelligence Agency (CIA), retired military officers and senior
officials from the administration of the current president's father
- in other words, all the foreign-policy specialists and "realists"
who initially raised questions about going to war in Iraq - for
resisting their calls for expanding the war to Syria, Iran, North
Korea and even Saudi Arabia. And they categorically reject, albeit
often defensively, any notion that the loss in momentum might be
due more to over-optimistic predictions by themselves and their
friends in the offices of Cheney and Rumsfeld about the ease with
which US forces could occupy Iraq without significant international
support.

Carl Evans, columnist for The Daily Camera in Boulder, Colorado,
accuses Perle and Frum (who he called "chicken hawk neocons") of
trying "to play God."

If it's obtuse to think you can banish terrorism (and it is), what
kind of hubris is required to say you can vanquish evil? You can
try, but as soon as you do, new evils inevitably, paradoxically
stain your effort. Because you're pursuing an unachievable goal,
you are forced into using increasingly harsh measures, and as a
result, innocents die - and evil remains. Ask the French about
Algeria.

The Economist also has some problems with the book. In a review
entitled "Breathlessly to victory," the Economist writes the book
contains plenty of "plain talking" but tends to skim over the details.

America's relations with the UN are settled in a brisk seven pages;
those with Russia in fewer than three. This makes the reader wonder
whether the boldness of the neo-conservative agenda is rootedas
they see itin clear thinking, plain talking and moral courage, or
whether it arises from a reckless disregard for complexity, shades
of grey or the possibility of unintended consequences.

Perle, meanwhile, continues to make headlines while he promotes the
book. Sunday he told CNN that Saudi Arabia also qualifies for the
"axis of evil" club. "I hope that those who believe that we are now
getting full cooperation are right," he added, referring to Kingdom's
willingness to work with the Bush administration to fight war
terrorism after September 11, 2001. "I have yet to see the evidence,"
Perle said. Saudi papers blasted Perle Monday, saying that he only
speaks the language of language of "force, murder and destruction."