The Middle East Quagmire

That's the only word for it...quagmire.  This area has evolved to become a "dog's breakfast".  It's a mess and difficult to describe.  And even more difficult to deal with.  I've been thinking about the candidates for President and how they'd handle national security.  And of course in this day and age, all national security roads either go through the Middle East or end with the Middle East.

As I look at the landscape, I'm not sure any of them are adept enough or patient enough to handle the quagmire safely.  Because it will take nuance, persuading, give and take, patience, and prodding to navigate safely.  Who can do that?  If you've been reading at all you know I have a love/hate relationship with Tom Friedman.  Most weeks he pisses me off.  But he's undeniably a smart guy with a lot of experience in the region, so I continue to pay attention.  His column in this week's NYT is as good a summary in a short package as you'll find.  You can read it here.  He rightly points out how much the region has changed, how the players are many and varied, and how old rules don't apply.  Here's the pull quote:

"This is not your grandfather’s Israel anymore, it’s not your oil company’s Saudi Arabia anymore, it’s not your NATO’s Turkey anymore, it’s not your cabdriver’s Iran anymore and it’s not your radical chic college professor’s Palestine anymore. It’s a wholly different beast now, slouching toward Bethlehem."

So the more I think about how dangerous it is and consider the candidates for President, the more worried I get.  As I said, it's not going to be easy.  But there is one guy who has shown unbelievable ignorance and naivety in developing his national security strategy.  Ted Cruz.  Check this out. 

"So just who is Dr. Victoria Coates, who appears to be Cruz's sole National Security Advisor?  Let us start with what she is not.  She has never worked in the Pentagon; never worked in the State Department; never worked in the intelligence community; never served in any branch off the military; never lived overseas representing the United States in any way; never worked for the federal government; never had a security clearance (Unless perhaps for editing.  I'll check that.); never written a book, or indeed any academic or professional article, on national security, any aspect of any of the branches of the military, or on modern international relations; never been in a combat zone, one of ours or anybody else's."

Dr. Coates is an art historian at the Cleveland Museum of Art!!  If he can choose someone who has no experience in national security to be a key advisor, what does that say about him?  For me it's just another reason that he is wholly unqualified to be President.  And that doesn't even take into account his breathtaking arrogance.

So after seeing Friedman's article describing the mess that is the Middle East and stumbling on the article about who one of the prime candidates would turn to for national security advise, I'm pretty concerned.  I've not checked out who the others are listening to.  But I will.  Stay tuned.  In large measure it is said that the job has become too big for one man.  That's why it is so important and a key capability of any candidate to choose smart, experienced, wise advisors who will tell truth to power.  That's really important in many areas, but even more important in national security.  Because that could be the difference between life and death!