Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Support Our Annual Fund Drive! CounterPunch is entirely supported by our readers. Your donations pay for our small staff, tiny office, writers, designers, techies, bandwidth and servers. We don’t owe anything to advertisers, foundations, one-percenters or political parties. You are our only safety net. Please make a tax-deductible donation today.
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Wolfowitz on Top of the World

by MICHAEL FLYNN

The controversial decision to nominate Paul Wolfowitz, widely regarded as one of the key proponents for the war in Iraq, to head the World Bank has placed the spotlight on the inner workings of the second Bush administration. Are the neoconservatives on the wane, now that the man purported to be their main standard bearer in the administration is being moved out? Do the departures of Wolfowitz and other ideologues like Douglas Feith augur a return to a more traditional conservative foreign policy? Or will Condoleezza Rice and the other Vulcans continue the aggressive interventionist agenda pushed by the neocons?

Wolfowitz’s move to the Bank has also spurred a new round of hand-wringing among some pundits about the undue influence of the neoconservatives, who now seem poised to take their agenda to a whole new playing field. Other observers, however, aren’t so sure about where Wolfowitz falls on the ideological sliding scale, and it seems clear that World Bank board members are not worried that its decision making will be held hostage to U.S. geopolitical interests—this despite some neocons’ hope that Wolfowitz will be able to turn the Bank into a “useful tool of American statecraft,” as one American Enterprise Institute scholar said.

It’s odd that a global capitalist institution will be taking on as its new leader a person whose political trajectory has had so little to do with global capital. Nor does Wolfowitz have much experience—apart from his brief stint as ambassador to Indonesia in the 1980s—with the Bank’s core mission, which includes poverty alleviation and development issues. In general, what little neoconservatism or its followers have said about economics can be summed up in two words: supply side.

Wolfowitz is not your average neoconservative. Although a longstanding hawk who seamlessly made the transition from anti-Soviet crusader to neo-imperialist true believer after the end of the Cold War, Wolfowitz nonetheless has expressed several contrarian views within the neoconservative camp. In particular, he has been much more flexible when it comes to Middle East peace, shying away from the extreme Likudnik line espoused by many neocons and showing concern for the plight of the Palestinians, including opposition to the Jewish settler movement.

Wolfowitz is also considered to be more of a thoughtful idealist than a pure neocon ideologue. But some fault this very idealism as being at the root of U.S. problems in Iraq. After accompanying Wolfowitz on a visit to Iraq in late 2003, the Washington Post’s David Ignatius wrote that he asked Wolfowitz if his “passion for the noble goals of the Iraq war might overwhelm the prudence and pragmatism that normally guide war planners. Wolfowitz didn’t answer directly, except to say that it was a good question.”

Similarly, in an interview conducted shortly after Wolfowitz’s nomination to the World Bank post, Tom Malinowksi of Human Rights Watch said of Wolfowitz: “He is a serious and thoughtful person who is genuinely interested in the promotion of democracy and human rights around the world and someone who understands that very few interests can be advanced without paying attention to the way people are being governed.”

Wolfowitz has a long track record of producing influential—and controversial—policy proposals on key aspects of U.S. defense policy: In the late 1970s, he participated on the Team B Strategic Objectives Panel, a notorious effort to reinterpret CIA intelligence on the Soviet threat that helped put the country on a confrontational path with the Soviet Union and set the stage for the Reagan arms build up; as Dick Cheney’s undersecretary of defense for policy in the Bush Sr. administration, he drafted—with I. Lewis Libby—a controversial “defense policy guidance” report that is widely regarded as an early blueprint for the George W. Bush administration’s preemptive defense posture and interventionist foreign policies; and he collaborated with the Project for the New American Century’s advocacy campaign calling for war in Iraq. He has also been associated, along with Doug Feith, with the work of the Office of Special Plans, the Pentagon outfit that George Tenet and others blamed for twisting the intelligence on Iraq.

Before joining the Bush administration, Wolfowitz was the dean of the Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies, the DC-based graduate school that has been home to a number of key neocon figures, including Gary Schmitt of the Project for the New American Century and the Defense Policy Board’s Eliot Cohen.

In 1992, while he was Cheney’s undersecretary of defense for policy, Wolfowitz was charged with producing a policy guidance report aimed at formulating a post-Cold War defense posture. Upset by President George H.W. Bush’s decision to leave Saddam Hussein’s regime in place after the 1991 Gulf War, Wolfowitz—along with “Scooter” Libby—argued in a draft version of the Defense Policy Guidance that the U.S. should actively deter nations from “aspiring to a larger regional or global role,” use preemptive force to prevent countries from developing weapons of mass destruction, and act alone if necessary.

Although the draft guidance was quashed soon after it was leaked to the New York Times, many of its ideas—in particular, the doctrine of preemption—later found their way into President George W. Bush’s national security strategy. The document also seems to have served as a template for the founding statement of principles of the Project for a New American Century, which was signed by a who’s who list of hawks and neocons who have served in the current administration, including Cheney, Libby, Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Elliott Abrams, Peter Rodman and Zalmay Khalilzad.

MICHAEL FLYNN is a research associate with the Right Web program of the International Relations Center (IRC), online at www.irc-online.org.

More articles by:

2016 Fund Drive
Smart. Fierce. Uncompromised. Support CounterPunch Now!

  • cp-store
  • donate paypal

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

Weekend Edition
September 30, 2016
Friday - Sunday
Henry Giroux
Thinking Dangerously in the Age of Normalized Ignorance
Stanley L. Cohen
Israel and Academic Freedom: a Closed Book
Paul Craig Roberts – Michael Hudson
Can Russia Learn From Brazil’s Fate? 
Andrew Levine
A Putrid Election: the Horserace as Farce
Mike Whitney
The Biggest Heist in Human History
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: the Sick Blue Line
Rob Urie
The Twilight of the Leisure Class
Vijay Prashad
In a Hall of Mirrors: Fear and Dislike at the Polls
Alexander Cockburn
The Man Who Built Clinton World
John Wight
Who Will Save Us From America?
Pepe Escobar
Afghanistan; It’s the Heroin, Stupid
W. T. Whitney
When Women’s Lives Don’t Matter
Howard Lisnoff
What was Missing From The Nation’s Interview with Bernie Sanders
Julian Vigo
“Ooops, I Did It Again”: How the BBC Funnels Stories for Financial Gain
Jeremy Brecher
Dakota Access Pipeline and the Future of American Labor
Binoy Kampmark
Pictures Left Incomplete: MH17 and the Joint Investigation Team
Andrew Kahn
Nader Gave Us Bush? Hillary Could Give Us Trump
Steve Horn
Obama Weakens Endangered Species Act
Dave Lindorff
US Propaganda Campaign to Demonize Russia in Full Gear over One-Sided Dutch/Aussie Report on Flight 17 Downing
John W. Whitehead
Uncomfortable Truths You Won’t Hear From the Presidential Candidates
Ramzy Baroud
Shimon Peres: Israel’s Nuclear Man
Brandon Jordan
The Battle for Mercosur
Murray Dobbin
A Globalization Wake-Up Call
Jesse Ventura
Corrupted Science: the DEA and Marijuana
Richard W. Behan
Installing a President by Force: Hillary Clinton and Our Moribund Democracy
Andrew Stewart
The Democratic Plot to Privatize Social Security
Daniel Borgstrom
On the Streets of Oakland, Expressing Solidarity with Charlotte
Marjorie Cohn
President Obama: ‘Patron’ of the Israeli Occupation
Norman Pollack
The “Self-Hating” Jew: A Critique
David Rosen
The Living Body & the Ecological Crisis
Joseph Natoli
Thoughtcrimes and Stupidspeak: Our Assault Against Words
Ron Jacobs
A Cycle of Death Underscored by Greed and a Lust for Power
Uri Avnery
Abu Mazen’s Balance Sheet
Kim Nicolini
Long Drive Home
Louisa Willcox
Tribes Make History with Signing of Grizzly Bear Treaty
Art Martin
The Matrix Around the Next Bend: Facebook, Augmented Reality and the Podification of the Populace
Andre Vltchek
Failures of the Western Left
Ishmael Reed
Millennialism or Extinctionism?
Frances Madeson
Why It’s Time to Create a Cabinet-Level Dept. of Native Affairs
Laura Finley
Presidential Debate Recommendations
José Negroni
Mass Firings on Broadway Lead Singers to Push Back
Leticia Cortez
Entering the Historical Dissonance Surrounding Desafinados
Robert J. Burrowes
Gandhi: ‘My Life is My Message’
Charles R. Larson
Queen Lear? Deborah Levy’s “Hot Milk”
David Yearsley
Bring on the Nibelungen: If Wagner Scored the Debates
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail
[i]
[i]
[i]
[i]