Really "hot" ideas from the ISG

John Podhoretz:

THE profound quality of the suggestions offered by the Iraq Study Group - the panel headed by former Secretary of State James Baker that presented its report with such fanfare to the president yesterday morning - can be inferred from the following passage on page 60:

"RECOMMENDATION 19: The President and the leadership of his national security team should remain in close and frequent contact with the Iraqi leadership."

Truly, a grateful nation should fall on its knees and thank the benevolent Creator that the nine wise men and one woman who comprise the Iraq Study Group were willing to sacrifice themselves and come together so that such a recommendation could be placed before our leaders and the world.

The nation's capital hasn't seen such concentrated wisdom in one place since Paris Hilton dined alone at the Hooters on Connecticut Avenue.

After all, only genius approaching the level of Paris could have written this sentence: "The Support Group should consist of Iraq and all the states bordering Iraq . . . and, of course, Iraq itself."

Yes, that's some Support Group, what with Iraq and Iraq in it together to support, um, Iraq.

Also in the Support Group: Iran and Syria. Yes, having done their best to destroy the new Iraq, these two tyrannical nations are poised to perform a very, very constructive role in helping to get the new Iraq up on its own two footsies!

And why? Because, see, it's in their interest to do so: "Although Iran sees it in its interest to have the United States bogged down in Iraq, Iran's interests would not be served by a failure of U.S. policy in Iraq that led to chaos and the territorial disintegration of the Iraqi state."

This is why we have commissions, you see. Regular dumb folk might look at the evidence of the past 25 years and think that the last thing Iran wants is a nice, strong and stable Iraq on its border. They might think that a strong and stable authoritarian Iraq might just attack Iran again and cause another 10-year war with deaths of millions. But here's the ISG to set us dumb people straight.

And even dumber people among us might think that if Iraq ends up strong and stable and Westernized, the Iranians would fear it might unduly influence Iran's own young population, hungry for Westernization and eager to see an end to the domination of the mullahs.

Yes, chaos and disorder would seem like a nice holiday gift to the Iranian theocracy, if you asked some of us dumb people. But then, we're dumb. Not like the ISG. Now we get it: Iran has, like, soooo much to gain from Iraq's getting better all the time.

As Paris would say, that analysis is hot!

...

Podhoretz thinks Paris is not really burning. He goes on to point out how none of this plan is in anyones interest. I think his analysis of Iran and Syria's interest is much closer to reality than the realist writing the report. In this study of interest, what is absence is a convincing account of why any of this is in Israel's interest. The fact of the matter is that the people responsible for the problems in Israel will not be held to account under the plan and the war to eliminate Israel would not be abated by the proposed solutions.