Bush administration crafting new message on Iraq
BY DICK POLMAN
Knight Ridder Newspapers
(KRT) - Stung by plummeting polls, the Bush administration is working on a new message about Iraq. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld road-tested it on the Sunday talk shows, and President Bush will flesh it out during a speech Tuesday night. The basic message, as articulated by Rumsfeld, goes something like this:
1. "Progress is being made politically and economically" in Iraq.
2. But the casualties could get worse over the next six months, and fighting could go on for "five, six, eight, 12 years."
3. And we have never miscalculated, erred, or misled you.
It's an ambitious message - a mix of the upbeat, the downbeat and the defiant. Whether a restive public buys the message may depend not on Bush's persuasive powers, but on the news from the battlefield. And this message arrives at a crucial juncture, with solid majorities of Americans now saying that invading Iraq was a mistake (a sharp reversal of the polls one year ago). At this point, 91.5 percent of all American military deaths have occurred since Bush declared on May 1, 2003, that "major combat" was over.
Worse yet, an administration known for its message discipline has been plagued lately by top officials sending contradictory signals. While Vice President Cheney is insisting that the insurgency is in its "last throes," military leaders are telling Congress that the insurgency is at least as strong as it was six months ago, buoyed by an ongoing influx of foreign fighters.
Bush, in his speech Tuesday night, will ask Americans to help him "stay the course" - in essence, to trust him anew as a war president. But for those who are increasingly skeptical about the war, trust may be the biggest hurdle. Only 32 percent of independent voters now support the war, according to Gallup, and the big drop in recent months has been fueled not just by the mounting casualties but by the perception that Bush and his war planners promised a short and relatively bloodless conflict.
As evidenced Sunday by Rumsfeld's televised remarks, however, it's clear that the administration, while seeking people's trust, does not want to entertain any suggestion that it made any mistakes in the past, whether intentional or not.
Rumsfeld told "Fox News Sunday," for example, that he had not made optimistic predictions during the prelude to war. Such a claim, he said, is "false. ... I have been balanced and measured."
Yet, on Feb. 7, 2003, more than a month before the war began, he predicted that "it could last six days, six weeks, I doubt six months." On Feb. 20, 2003, he told PBS that the Americans "would be welcomed," as happened in Afghanistan, where people in the streets were "playing music, cheering, flying kites." (Seven months later, when a broadcast journalist asked Rumsfeld about his PBS remarks, he replied: "Never said that. Never did. ... You're thinking of somebody else.")
Also Sunday, Rumsfeld told NBC's "Meet the Press" that any rosy prewar predictions (which he denies were made) would have been inappropriate. He said: "Anyone who tries to estimate the end, the time, the cost, or the casualties in a war is making a big mistake." Yet it was Cheney, on March 16, 2003, who said "I think it will go relatively quickly ... weeks rather than months." A month earlier, Bush budget official Mitchell E. Daniels Jr. publicly estimated that the war could cost roughly $60 billion. (The current cost is $208 billion.)
Clearly, the administration is seeking a clean slate on forecasts. Rosy talk is out. The new message is designed to prepare the public for a long slog, figuring that Americans will stay the course if they get the bad news up front. Talk of "progress" will be tempered by talk about the grim realities of war. In Rumsfeld's words Sunday, "it's violence, it's tough, it's terrible."
He recalled that, during the run-up to war, he had prepared for Bush a list of "15 things that could go terribly wrong," including oil fields set afire and mass refugees on the roads. NBC interviewer Tim Russert then asked whether he had put "a robust insurgency" on the list. Rumsfeld replied: "I don't remember if that was on there."
He didn't offer any forecast on when the Iraqi security forces would be ready to assume the brunt of the fighting, in part because the United States is busy trying to help the Iraqis develop criteria for measuring troop readiness. (There have been reports that only three Iraqi battalions are combat-ready; the U.S. military estimates that it needs 107.)
Rumsfeld did seek, at several points, to defend Cheney's contention that the insurgency is in its last throes. He told "Fox News Sunday" that "last throes could be a violent last throes, or a placid and calm last throes," his way of saying that the insurgency could burn out quickly or persist for years. He did say, however, that "I will anticipate that you'll see an escalation of violence between now and the (next round of Iraqi) elections" next winter.
In essence, the message is that America will be fighting in Iraq through the end of Bush's tenure, and that people should not dwell on what Rumsfeld calls "the negative day after day, in the press and on television." (He didn't address the fact that some of the most negative reports lately have come from publications such as the Marine Corps Times, which has written about inadequate body armor, and recalls of armored vests.)
The administration's challenge is to rekindle confidence among middle-of-the-road Americans who are glad Saddam Hussein is gone, yet wonder whether the costs in U.S. blood and treasure have been worth it. But another key challenge is to reinforce ties between Bush and his conservative base, because Gallup reports that support for the war among Republicans has dropped 11 percentage points since March. Bush's base is still hanging tough, but further erosion could seriously narrow his political options.
Hence, the new message - upbeat, downbeat and defiant, coupled with fresh charges that liberals and Democrats are weak on defense. In the words of conservative commentator and blogger Andrew Sullivan, "If you want to know how well the administration really believes the war is going, listen to their rhetoric."
BY DICK POLMAN
Knight Ridder Newspapers
(KRT) - Stung by plummeting polls, the Bush administration is working on a new message about Iraq. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld road-tested it on the Sunday talk shows, and President Bush will flesh it out during a speech Tuesday night. The basic message, as articulated by Rumsfeld, goes something like this:
1. "Progress is being made politically and economically" in Iraq.
2. But the casualties could get worse over the next six months, and fighting could go on for "five, six, eight, 12 years."
3. And we have never miscalculated, erred, or misled you.
It's an ambitious message - a mix of the upbeat, the downbeat and the defiant. Whether a restive public buys the message may depend not on Bush's persuasive powers, but on the news from the battlefield. And this message arrives at a crucial juncture, with solid majorities of Americans now saying that invading Iraq was a mistake (a sharp reversal of the polls one year ago). At this point, 91.5 percent of all American military deaths have occurred since Bush declared on May 1, 2003, that "major combat" was over.
Worse yet, an administration known for its message discipline has been plagued lately by top officials sending contradictory signals. While Vice President Cheney is insisting that the insurgency is in its "last throes," military leaders are telling Congress that the insurgency is at least as strong as it was six months ago, buoyed by an ongoing influx of foreign fighters.
Bush, in his speech Tuesday night, will ask Americans to help him "stay the course" - in essence, to trust him anew as a war president. But for those who are increasingly skeptical about the war, trust may be the biggest hurdle. Only 32 percent of independent voters now support the war, according to Gallup, and the big drop in recent months has been fueled not just by the mounting casualties but by the perception that Bush and his war planners promised a short and relatively bloodless conflict.
As evidenced Sunday by Rumsfeld's televised remarks, however, it's clear that the administration, while seeking people's trust, does not want to entertain any suggestion that it made any mistakes in the past, whether intentional or not.
Rumsfeld told "Fox News Sunday," for example, that he had not made optimistic predictions during the prelude to war. Such a claim, he said, is "false. ... I have been balanced and measured."
Yet, on Feb. 7, 2003, more than a month before the war began, he predicted that "it could last six days, six weeks, I doubt six months." On Feb. 20, 2003, he told PBS that the Americans "would be welcomed," as happened in Afghanistan, where people in the streets were "playing music, cheering, flying kites." (Seven months later, when a broadcast journalist asked Rumsfeld about his PBS remarks, he replied: "Never said that. Never did. ... You're thinking of somebody else.")
Also Sunday, Rumsfeld told NBC's "Meet the Press" that any rosy prewar predictions (which he denies were made) would have been inappropriate. He said: "Anyone who tries to estimate the end, the time, the cost, or the casualties in a war is making a big mistake." Yet it was Cheney, on March 16, 2003, who said "I think it will go relatively quickly ... weeks rather than months." A month earlier, Bush budget official Mitchell E. Daniels Jr. publicly estimated that the war could cost roughly $60 billion. (The current cost is $208 billion.)
Clearly, the administration is seeking a clean slate on forecasts. Rosy talk is out. The new message is designed to prepare the public for a long slog, figuring that Americans will stay the course if they get the bad news up front. Talk of "progress" will be tempered by talk about the grim realities of war. In Rumsfeld's words Sunday, "it's violence, it's tough, it's terrible."
He recalled that, during the run-up to war, he had prepared for Bush a list of "15 things that could go terribly wrong," including oil fields set afire and mass refugees on the roads. NBC interviewer Tim Russert then asked whether he had put "a robust insurgency" on the list. Rumsfeld replied: "I don't remember if that was on there."
He didn't offer any forecast on when the Iraqi security forces would be ready to assume the brunt of the fighting, in part because the United States is busy trying to help the Iraqis develop criteria for measuring troop readiness. (There have been reports that only three Iraqi battalions are combat-ready; the U.S. military estimates that it needs 107.)
Rumsfeld did seek, at several points, to defend Cheney's contention that the insurgency is in its last throes. He told "Fox News Sunday" that "last throes could be a violent last throes, or a placid and calm last throes," his way of saying that the insurgency could burn out quickly or persist for years. He did say, however, that "I will anticipate that you'll see an escalation of violence between now and the (next round of Iraqi) elections" next winter.
In essence, the message is that America will be fighting in Iraq through the end of Bush's tenure, and that people should not dwell on what Rumsfeld calls "the negative day after day, in the press and on television." (He didn't address the fact that some of the most negative reports lately have come from publications such as the Marine Corps Times, which has written about inadequate body armor, and recalls of armored vests.)
The administration's challenge is to rekindle confidence among middle-of-the-road Americans who are glad Saddam Hussein is gone, yet wonder whether the costs in U.S. blood and treasure have been worth it. But another key challenge is to reinforce ties between Bush and his conservative base, because Gallup reports that support for the war among Republicans has dropped 11 percentage points since March. Bush's base is still hanging tough, but further erosion could seriously narrow his political options.
Hence, the new message - upbeat, downbeat and defiant, coupled with fresh charges that liberals and Democrats are weak on defense. In the words of conservative commentator and blogger Andrew Sullivan, "If you want to know how well the administration really believes the war is going, listen to their rhetoric."
