The Belgravia Dispatch: The Freshman

January 01, 2007

The Freshman

Deborah Solomon interviewed James Webb last Saturday over at the NYT Magazine. A couple excerpts, in case you missed:

Q: You previously belonged to the Republican Party and held two big positions — assistant secretary of defense and, later, secretary of the Navy — under President Reagan.
A: I am very proud to have served in the Reagan administration. He had the ability to inspire people in this country in terms of how they viewed themselves as Americans.

Q: Why did you decide to switch and become a Democrat?

A: A lot of people have left the Republican Party because they went over there like me on national-security issues and were never comfortable on other issues — social issues or issues of economic fairness — and now are beginning to see that the Democrats can have a stronger position on foreign policy.

And:

Q: As a decorated veteran of the Vietnam War, do you have a timetable in mind for getting us out of Iraq?
A: I have a totally different view of timetables than most people. What we need before we start withdrawing large numbers of troops is some sort of a diplomatic environment in which we can decide how to withdraw our troops.

Q: Right, most Americans seem to agree that we need to involve other countries.

A: What has been missing for the last couple of years is the aggressive diplomatic approach that would then allow you to withdraw your troops. We have been doing this backward by putting the cart before the horse. [emphasis added]

Keep a close eye on Webb. I suspect he's going to be one of the very best pols we've got in the Senate--at least if you prefer independent thinkers to the goose-stepping herds that too often pass as legislators.

P.S. It's good to see some Senators like Dodd and Specter (who like Webb understand the critical importance of a region-wide diplomatic approach) ditching the Crawford variant of the Führerprinzip and traveling to places like Damascus to (unthinkable!) actually dialogue with leaders with whom relations are strained. Sacrilege for bovine true-believers, I know, but increasingly critical as the regional situation continues to dangerously deteriorate.

Posted by Gregory at January 1, 2007 12:48 AM

Comments

Glad to see you back and quite prolific.
Happy New Year to Reasoned Voices.

Posted by: Dr. Know at January 1, 2007 03:33 AM | Permalink to this comment

What is missing is any diplomatic effort. We have none. Not at the UN, not in the middle east. No where in the world do we have any credible diplomatic efforts.
Six years with zero effort.

The idea of bringing change by force hasn't worked in the past 50 years and will not work now. The "sanctions" put in place to achieve changed hasn't worked in Cuba or any other place in the world. Only by open dialogue and exchanges, including trading, will change begin to happen. KitCarson

Posted by: KitCarson at January 1, 2007 10:14 PM | Permalink to this comment

While not being by any means whatsoever a member of the political Right here in America, much less a member of the Republican party, one is not entirely enthusiastic about Mr. Djerejian postive view of Senator-Elect Webb. Actually, having read the interview in the New York Times Sunday Magazine when it first came out, I was not very surprised at the contents of the interview. First, one must remember that the interviewer, Miss Deborah Solomon, is herself quite liberal (in the American sense) and, hence the entire interview was something in the nature of a
'soft-ball' exercise. She singularly failed to ask any difficult or hard
questions of Secretary Webb. So, for instance she failed to note that Webb has changed various of his positions recently for reasons which are not entirely transparent, except that he could not be (in one instance) against admitting Women to Annapolis pour example, and run on the Democratic Party line.

As per Webb's comments on the current situation in Iraq, I found them entire jejune, and rien plus, as it were...Id est, nothing but, the usual Washington Pays Legal, chattering classes chit chat. Who but his dead uncle has not talked of the need for a 'diplomatic effort' in Iraq, in the last two or three months now. If not longer in fact, even prior to the ISG report. And, by the bye: what in the name of heaven is a 'aggressive diplomatic approach'? As opposed to an 'unaggressive diplomatic approach'? It is only the mere fact, that Messers. Webb, Biden et. al., do not have to implement any of their proposed solutions, that enables them to continue floating them. Not matter how unrealistic they are. Which, nota bene: is not to gainsay the positive value of diplomatic pourparlers, it is just a reminder that per se, such efforts, will avail the USA nothing, absolutley nothing in Iraq. As informed commentators have noted (see especially Nir Rose articles in particular) no outside power, has any great, determining influence in what is going on in Iraq currently. Unfortunately much of the mayhem currently going on in the country is purely Iraqi-based sectarian bloodshed, Shiite versus Sunni. Or more recently especially in Basra, Shiite versus Shiite warfare. In no case whatseover, does talking with anyone resolve these issues. Something that Senator-Elect Webb appears to be cheerfully ignorant of...

Posted by: Charles Coutinho, PH. D. at January 2, 2007 06:47 AM | Permalink to this comment

As informed commentators have noted (see especially Nir Rose articles in particular) no outside power, has any great, determining influence in what is going on in Iraq currently.

This is obviously correct.

So why are we spending $12 billion a *month*, plus a dozen or so soldiers dead and a much larger number wounded, trying to control all that?

Out now.

Posted by: J Thomas at January 2, 2007 05:07 PM | Permalink to this comment

Charles,
Do you really think Sen. Webb(isn't swearing in today?) is ignorant of something that could get his son killed? You do know that Sen. Webb's son is over in Iraq right now, don't you?

Posted by: Ghost of Tom Joad at January 2, 2007 05:40 PM | Permalink to this comment

CC,
What a load of puffed up bombast. Newt would be proud.

Posted by: Dr. Know at January 3, 2007 10:13 AM | Permalink to this comment

"I was not very surprised at the contents of the interview. First, one must remember that the interviewer, Miss Deborah Solomon, is herself quite liberal (in the American sense) and, hence the entire interview was something in the nature of a
'soft-ball' exercise. She singularly failed to ask any difficult or hard
questions of Secretary Webb"

The press should only ask tough questions of critics of the administration. Three years of "we are winning" before any tough questions were asked of the administration says it all.

Posted by: centrist at January 3, 2007 03:45 PM | Permalink to this comment

	« Cordesman, Heisbourg, Etc. \| Main \| "Surge" Query » January 01, 2007 The Freshman Deborah Solomon interviewed James Webb last Saturday over at the NYT Magazine. A couple excerpts, in case you missed: Q: You previously belonged to the Republican Party and held two big positions — assistant secretary of defense and, later, secretary of the Navy — under President Reagan. A: I am very proud to have served in the Reagan administration. He had the ability to inspire people in this country in terms of how they viewed themselves as Americans. Q: Why did you decide to switch and become a Democrat? A: A lot of people have left the Republican Party because they went over there like me on national-security issues and were never comfortable on other issues — social issues or issues of economic fairness — and now are beginning to see that the Democrats can have a stronger position on foreign policy. And: Q: As a decorated veteran of the Vietnam War, do you have a timetable in mind for getting us out of Iraq? A: I have a totally different view of timetables than most people. What we need before we start withdrawing large numbers of troops is some sort of a diplomatic environment in which we can decide how to withdraw our troops. Q: Right, most Americans seem to agree that we need to involve other countries. A: What has been missing for the last couple of years is the aggressive diplomatic approach that would then allow you to withdraw your troops. We have been doing this backward by putting the cart before the horse. [emphasis added] Keep a close eye on Webb. I suspect he's going to be one of the very best pols we've got in the Senate--at least if you prefer independent thinkers to the goose-stepping herds that too often pass as legislators. P.S. It's good to see some Senators like Dodd and Specter (who like Webb understand the critical importance of a region-wide diplomatic approach) ditching the Crawford variant of the Führerprinzip and traveling to places like Damascus to (unthinkable!) actually dialogue with leaders with whom relations are strained. Sacrilege for bovine true-believers, I know, but increasingly critical as the regional situation continues to dangerously deteriorate. Posted by Gregory at January 1, 2007 12:48 AM Comments Glad to see you back and quite prolific. Happy New Year to Reasoned Voices. Posted by: Dr. Know at January 1, 2007 03:33 AM \| Permalink to this comment What is missing is any diplomatic effort. We have none. Not at the UN, not in the middle east. No where in the world do we have any credible diplomatic efforts. Six years with zero effort. The idea of bringing change by force hasn't worked in the past 50 years and will not work now. The "sanctions" put in place to achieve changed hasn't worked in Cuba or any other place in the world. Only by open dialogue and exchanges, including trading, will change begin to happen. KitCarson Posted by: KitCarson at January 1, 2007 10:14 PM \| Permalink to this comment While not being by any means whatsoever a member of the political Right here in America, much less a member of the Republican party, one is not entirely enthusiastic about Mr. Djerejian postive view of Senator-Elect Webb. Actually, having read the interview in the New York Times Sunday Magazine when it first came out, I was not very surprised at the contents of the interview. First, one must remember that the interviewer, Miss Deborah Solomon, is herself quite liberal (in the American sense) and, hence the entire interview was something in the nature of a 'soft-ball' exercise. She singularly failed to ask any difficult or hard questions of Secretary Webb. So, for instance she failed to note that Webb has changed various of his positions recently for reasons which are not entirely transparent, except that he could not be (in one instance) against admitting Women to Annapolis pour example, and run on the Democratic Party line. As per Webb's comments on the current situation in Iraq, I found them entire jejune, and rien plus, as it were...Id est, nothing but, the usual Washington Pays Legal, chattering classes chit chat. Who but his dead uncle has not talked of the need for a 'diplomatic effort' in Iraq, in the last two or three months now. If not longer in fact, even prior to the ISG report. And, by the bye: what in the name of heaven is a 'aggressive diplomatic approach'? As opposed to an 'unaggressive diplomatic approach'? It is only the mere fact, that Messers. Webb, Biden et. al., do not have to implement any of their proposed solutions, that enables them to continue floating them. Not matter how unrealistic they are. Which, nota bene: is not to gainsay the positive value of diplomatic pourparlers, it is just a reminder that per se, such efforts, will avail the USA nothing, absolutley nothing in Iraq. As informed commentators have noted (see especially Nir Rose articles in particular) no outside power, has any great, determining influence in what is going on in Iraq currently. Unfortunately much of the mayhem currently going on in the country is purely Iraqi-based sectarian bloodshed, Shiite versus Sunni. Or more recently especially in Basra, Shiite versus Shiite warfare. In no case whatseover, does talking with anyone resolve these issues. Something that Senator-Elect Webb appears to be cheerfully ignorant of... Posted by: Charles Coutinho, PH. D. at January 2, 2007 06:47 AM \| Permalink to this comment As informed commentators have noted (see especially Nir Rose articles in particular) no outside power, has any great, determining influence in what is going on in Iraq currently. This is obviously correct. So why are we spending $12 billion a month, plus a dozen or so soldiers dead and a much larger number wounded, trying to control all that? Out now. Posted by: J Thomas at January 2, 2007 05:07 PM \| Permalink to this comment Charles, Do you really think Sen. Webb(isn't swearing in today?) is ignorant of something that could get his son killed? You do know that Sen. Webb's son is over in Iraq right now, don't you? Posted by: Ghost of Tom Joad at January 2, 2007 05:40 PM \| Permalink to this comment CC, What a load of puffed up bombast. Newt would be proud. Posted by: Dr. Know at January 3, 2007 10:13 AM \| Permalink to this comment "I was not very surprised at the contents of the interview. First, one must remember that the interviewer, Miss Deborah Solomon, is herself quite liberal (in the American sense) and, hence the entire interview was something in the nature of a 'soft-ball' exercise. She singularly failed to ask any difficult or hard questions of Secretary Webb" The press should only ask tough questions of critics of the administration. Three years of "we are winning" before any tough questions were asked of the administration says it all. Posted by: centrist at January 3, 2007 03:45 PM \| Permalink to this comment		About Belgravia Dispatch Gregory Djerejian, an international lawyer and business executive, comments intermittently on global politics, finance & diplomacy at this site. The views expressed herein are solely his own and do not represent those of any organization. More About the Author Email the Author Recent Entries Lunch w/ the FT... Robert Strange McNamara Biden on Israel/Iran Mea Culpa (Part II) Something of A Mea Culpa Search Search this site: The News Financial Times New York Times Wall Street Journal The Economist The Times The Spectator Daily Telegraph The New Yorker Washington Post New Criterion New Republic National Review The Atlantic The American Conservative Harpers The Week The Guardian Weekly Standard The Nation Real Clear Politics Le Figaro Le Monde El Pais Pravda The Blogs Across the Aisle Marc Ambinder American Footprints The American Scene Bainbridge Jack Balkin Becker-Posner Balloon Juice Steve Clemons Juan Cole The Corner Crooked Timber Cunning Realist Democracy Arsensal Daniel Drezner Washington Monthly James Fallows Glenn Greenwald Nikolas Gvosdev Huffington Post Mark Kleiman Joshua Landis Daniel Larison Marc Lynch Josh Marshall Progressive Realist Obsidian Wings George Packer Gideon Rachman Andrew Sullivan Katrina vanden Heuvel Volokh Conspiracy Steve Walt James Wolcott Matthew Yglesias Foreign Affairs Commentariat Foreign Affairs Foreign Policy Le Monde Diplomatique National Interest Law & Finance Barron's Bloomberg Bull and Bear Wise Calculated Risk Marketwatch Contrary Investor Corporate Counsel Blog DealBreaker Deal Lawyers Blog Financial Sense Forbes Fortune Hussman Funds Bruce MacEwen Barry Ritholz Nouriel Roubini Safe Haven SCOTUS Blog Seeking Alpha The Street 10b-5 Daily Yahoo Finance Think Tanks AEI Baker Institute Brookings Carnegie Cato CFR CSIS Heritage IISS Intl Crisis Group USIP Security Janes Fed. American Scientists Defense Tech Global Security Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Books American Scholar LRB NYRB NYT Book Review Paris Review TLS Granta Grand Street Arts & Letters Daily TNR's The Book The City Curbed Eater Gothamist NY Magazine NY Post NY Press New York Observer Tribeca Trib Vanishing NY Village Voice Epicurean Corner Wine Terroirs The Burgundy Report Richard Kelley Andrew Jefford Archives Browse Archives Syndicate this site: Belgravia Dispatch Maintained by: www.vikeny.com Powered by

	© 2010 Belgravia Dispatch