Bush now denies official policy of deBaathification

The decision to disband the Iraqi army, after substantive war operations had finished, is now widely regarded as one of the most blatantly wrong-headed errors made by the Bush Administration in its efforts to establish a semblance of stability in the post-war occupation. It immediately jeopardised the claims of the Americans that they were there as liberators, and disastrously pushed thousands of trained soldiers in to the arms of the insurgency.

In the past, this decision has been righteously defended by the usual apologists, so we've had no reason to ponder its status as a deliberate decision. But recent comments by Bush try to muddy the waters on this. Apparently Bush now avows all knowledge of this decision as being his administration's official policy, despite the fact that it was executed by his appointee Bremer, with documentary evidence proving he was fully aware of the policy.

Obviously, given how gungho key insiders, such as Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld, were for the policy of deBaathification, it is impossible to create any kind of distance between his administration and the decision to disband the army, regardless of what Bush actually knew or didn't know. However, the scary thing is that Bush may very well be so stupidly aloof that even when he knows things, he doesn't really understand or drive policy in any significant way. If this report is to be believed, the decision may have been made by a relatively low level national security adviser: Walter Slocombe.

The establishment media, including moderate liberals, have always tried to shield Bush from too withering a criticism of his capabilities and intelligence. It couldn't possibly be, so they say, that Bush really is the idiot his critics allege, given he is so wealthy and has won two US elections. Their public pretension at a bourgeois meritocracy, and the benignity of US power, simply cannot countenance that a grotesquely thoughtless fratboy could become the leader of the free world. Well, I think these kind of revelations make their attempts to garner bipartisan respectability by rescuing Bush's reputation, and attacking the left, appear all the more foolish. I'm looking at you Jon Faine! No doubt posterity will reveal an even more brutal assessment of Bush. Although given how softly a proven airhead like Reagan is treated now, I probably shouldn't be too hasty in counting on that possibility.