IRAQ: resignation letter

From: Michael Wiik (mwiik@messagenet.com)
Date: Fri Feb 28 2003 - 00:34:39 MST

  • Next message: Spudboy100@aol.com: "Beating Carnot Engines"

    << U.S. Diplomat's Letter of Resignation

    The following is the text of John Brady Kiesling's letter of resignation
      to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell. Mr. Kiesling is a career
    diplomat who has served in United States embassies from Tel Aviv to
    Casablanca to Yerevan.

    Dear Mr. Secretary:

    I am writing you to submit my resignation from the Foreign Service of
    the United States and from my position as Political Counselor in U.S.
    Embassy Athens, effective March 7. I do so with a heavy heart. The
    baggage of my upbringing included a felt obligation to give something
    back to my country. Service as a U.S. diplomat was a dream job. I was
    paid to understand foreign languages and cultures, to seek out
    diplomats, politicians, scholars and journalists, and to persuade them
    that U.S. interests and theirs fundamentally coincided. My faith in my
    country and its values was the most powerful weapon in my diplomatic
    arsenal.

    It is inevitable that during twenty years with the State Department I
    would become more sophisticated and cynical about the narrow and selfish
    bureaucratic motives that sometimes shaped our policies. Human nature is
    what it is, and I was rewarded and promoted for understanding human
    nature. But until this Administration it had been possible to believe
    that by upholding the policies of my president I was also upholding the
    interests of the American people and the world. I believe it no longer.

    The policies we are now asked to advance are incompatible not only with
    American values but also with American interests. Our fervent pursuit of
    war with Iraq is driving us to squander the international legitimacy
    that has been America’s most potent weapon of both offense and defense
    since the days of Woodrow Wilson. We have begun to dismantle the largest
    and most effective web of international relationships the world has ever
    known. Our current course will bring instability and danger, not security.

    The sacrifice of global interests to domestic politics and to
    bureaucratic self- interest is nothing new, and it is certainly not a
    uniquely American problem. Still, we have not seen such systematic
    distortion of intelligence, such systematic manipulation of American
    opinion, since the war in Vietnam. The September 11 tragedy left us
    stronger than before, rallying around us a vast international coalition
    to cooperate for the first time in a systematic way against the threat
    of terrorism. But rather than take credit for those successes and build
    on them, this Administration has chosen to make terrorism a domestic
    political tool, enlisting a scattered and largely defeated Al Qaeda as
    its bureaucratic ally. We spread disproportionate terror and confusion
    in the public mind, arbitrarily linking the unrelated problems of
    terrorism and Iraq. The result, and perhaps the motive, is to justify a
    vast misallocation of shrinking public wealth to the military and to
    weaken the safeguards that protect American citizens from the heavy hand
    of government. September 11 did not do as much damage to the fabric of
    American society as we seem determined to so to ourselves. Is the Russia
    of the late Romanovs really our model, a selfish, superstitious empire
    thrashing toward self-destruction in the name of a doomed status quo?

    We should ask ourselves why we have failed to persuade more of the world
    that a war with Iraq is necessary. We have over the past two years done
    too much to assert to our world partners that narrow and mercenary U.S.
    interests override the cherished values of our partners. Even where our
    aims were not in question, our consistency is at issue. The model of
    Afghanistan is little comfort to allies wondering on what basis we plan
    to rebuild the Middle East, and in whose image and interests. Have we
    indeed become blind, as Russia is blind in Chechnya, as Israel is blind
    in the Occupied Territories, to our own advice, that overwhelming
    military power is not the answer to terrorism? After the shambles of
    post-war Iraq joins the shambles in Grozny and Ramallah, it will be a
    brave foreigner who forms ranks with Micronesia to follow where we lead.

    We have a coalition still, a good one. The loyalty of many of our
    friends is impressive, a tribute to American moral capital built up over
    a century. But our closest allies are persuaded less that war is
    justified than that it would be perilous to allow the U.S. to drift into
    complete solipsism. Loyalty should be reciprocal. Why does our President
    condone the swaggering and contemptuous approach to our friends and
    allies this Administration is fostering, including among its most senior
    officials. Has “oderint dum metuant” really become our motto?

    I urge you to listen to America’s friends around the world. Even here in
    Greece, purported hotbed of European anti-Americanism, we have more and
    closer friends than the American newspaper reader can possibly imagine.
    Even when they complain about American arrogance, Greeks know that the
    world is a difficult and dangerous place, and they want a strong
    international system, with the U.S. and EU in close partnership. When
    our friends are afraid of us rather than for us, it is time to worry.
    And now they are afraid. Who will tell them convincingly that the United
    States is as it was, a beacon of liberty, security, and justice for the
    planet?

    Mr. Secretary, I have enormous respect for your character and ability.
    You have preserved more international credibility for us than our policy
    deserves, and salvaged something positive from the excesses of an
    ideological and self- serving Administration. But your loyalty to the
    President goes too far. We are straining beyond its limits an
    international system we built with such toil and treasure, a web of
    laws, treaties, organizations, and shared values that sets limits on our
    foes far more effectively than it ever constrained America’s ability to
    defend its interests.

    I am resigning because I have tried and failed to reconcile my
    conscience with my ability to represent the current U.S. Administration.
    I have confidence that our democratic process is ultimately
    self-correcting, and hope that in a small way I can contribute from
    outside to shaping policies that better serve the security and
    prosperity of the American people and the world we share. >>

    http://www10.nytimes.com/2003/02/27/international/27WEB-TNAT.html?pagewanted=1

    fyi,
            -Mike

    -- 
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 28 2003 - 00:34:25 MST