MICHAEL IGNATIEFF NON-APOLOGY

INTELLECTUAL CASUISTRY

Michael Ignatieff is the deputy leader of the Liberal Party of Canada. He has written a piece in The New York Times, admitting – 4 years later – that he was wrong to support the American invasion of Iraq.

Mr. Ignatieff’s mea culpa would have been much more credible had it been much shorter, limited to say, the title of his article by itself "Wrong About Iraq" and then making a straightforward admission that he had completely mis-judged the consequences of the attack. 

It would have been more credible had it been less suffused with academic rambling. Credulity is strained by the admission of this political leader and political scientist, no less, who apparently ignored history in his unwavering support for a military invasion. The entire exercise was a defiance of history from the get-go.

Mr. Ignatieff makes much of his belief that politicians must have a "sense of reality" about decisions they make. Well, attacking a distant country, with a different culture, in the heart of a region that had an historic distrust of the west, never made sense, either real or imagined. It was particularly senseless in light of the obvious fact that there existed no provocation for the preemptive strike.

If only Ignatieff had taken the time to look – the historic precedents were there – including Vietnam for the Americans and Algeria for the French. The idea that the invaders would be embraced as liberators and occupiers bespeaks an almost boundless arrogance. Even more arrogant was the idea that it was America’s divine duty to impose a new political system on Iraq and thus transform the Middle East.What nonsense! Mr. Ignatieff would do well to read Cecil Woodham-Smith’s book, "The Reason Why". That’s the appalling story of  why the "light Brigade" marched so foolishly into the so-called "Valley of Death". It is an indictment of the very kind of imperial ambition the Bush people demonstrated with their assault on Iraq.

Furthermore,at the time of Ignatieffs eager push for the war, there was an effective and legitimate process underway. An international arms inspection was in full swing and accomplishing a great deal. Rockets were being cut up and U.N. helicopters were scouring the countryside with ground-penetrating radar. Bush cut that process short and Ignatieff dutifully applauded.

Nor did he seem to care about the consequences for the people of Iraq…the inevitable collateral damge to innocent civilian life and the complete disruption of civilian routine that a strike would bring. It was obvious to anyone with "a sense of reality" that a high tech military invasion would bring chaos to the society and severe damage to an already fragile infrastructure.

When a senior American General suggested that a half million troops would be required to secure and rebuild Iraq, he was fired. The fact is that Ignatieff bought the Bush/Cheney propaganda hook line and sinker. Only now is he choking on it.

Mr. Ignatieff writes that, "The attribute that underpins good judgment in politicians is having "a sense of reality". The Bush administration showed none of that in its rush to war.

Naturally, he blames George Bush  for the fiasco, saying that the president "did not take care to understand Iraq". He says in effect that Bush made the wrong decision because he led a "charmed life" and goes on to say that "…in charmed lives warning bells do not sound".

Mr. Ignatieff would be more credible had he simply written a letter saying that he was wrong because he himself had led a "charmed life"; he could then have explained why no alarm bells sounded in his own head.

His roundabout way of admitting that he was wrong about Iraq, does not inspire confidence in his ability to make the sound judgements required of an effective political leader. Although, as he himself says, it is always possible to learn.

However in the meantime, Ignatieff’s deputy leadership role with the Liberal Party is just one more reason why it’s unlikely that we will ever again see a majority government in this country.

And that may be a good thing.