How does a patriotic conservative behave when he believes his country has made a mistake by entering a war?

“Politics ends at the water’s edge” has been the conventional wisdom since 1940’s.  The statement was made by Senator Arthur Vandenberg, a Midwestern isolationist who signed on to FDR’s adventurism and the postwar crusade against the Soviet Union.  Vandenberg’s about-face is usually attributed to patriotism or anticommunist Realpolitik.  The reality turns out to be somewhat less noble: British intelligence agents set up the highly susceptible senator with an attractive woman and then blackmailed him into submission, an operation documented in Thomas Mahl’s Desperate Deception.

The corollary to Vandenberg’s dictum is that, as loyal citizens, we must support the troops or even that we must obey the Commander in Chief.  The President, however, is the Commander in Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces, not of the citizens of the United States.  To suggest otherwise is to treat our country as a military dictatorship.  Every nation demands loyalty from its citizens, and no decent American would give aid and comfort to an enemy or undermine the morale of American soldiers.  One complicating factor is that we no longer have a citizen army drafted from the people but a volunteer army whose members have enlisted for a variety of reasons: good pay, education, career advancement.  It is more accurate to say that we support them not as citizen-soldiers (which, for the most part, they are not) but as our fellow citizens who have elected to become soldiers.  In the same spirit, we support the police and firemen or American diplomats who are attacked or kidnapped by the enemies of our country.

It is one thing to support the troops, however, and another to give a blank check to a particular administration.  What is the difference, morally speaking, between the statement “I support the troops, no matter what the cause and no matter how the war is conducted” and “I was only following orders”?  Morally responsible people cannot suspend their consciences in time of war, and if the United States decided to use poison gas or nuclear weapons against the people of Iraq, moral people would be obliged to speak out; and if there are moral Americans who agree with the Pope that the United States is not justified in her war against Iraq, then they have the right and obligation to speak their minds—within the limits of civility and loyalty.

Different wars, it must be said, require differing responses.  There are legitimate reasons for muting or even silencing criticism during wars in which the very survival of the country may be threatened, as France was threatened in World War II and the United States in the War of 1812.  In most wars, however, national survival is not at issue, and citizens are more free to question both the motives and the conduct of the war, as G.K. Chesterton did in the Boer War and Lincoln did in the Mexican War.

A significant minority of Americans do not believe that the government of the United States has a just cause to invade Iraq.  Some (Chronicles editors among them) have argued that the longterm result of this war will be an increase of Islamic terrorism against the United States, the solidification of Arabic hatred of our ally Israel, and the formation of anti-American alliances among France, Germany, Belgium, Russia, China, and who knows how many other important states.  In the months leading up to the war—upon which George Bush resolved absolutely at least a year ago, which his advisors urged upon him shortly after the election, and which the neoconservatives claim to have decided on before the end of 1997—many of us spoke out forcefully against what we believed then (and still believe) to be a wrongheaded policy.  Now that the war has come and some of the predictions are already coming true (though the American media is not covering the violent demonstrations taking place in the Islamic world), it would be a mistake either to withdraw from the position we have taken or, insofar as the future is concerned, to fall silent on the difficult issues that our nation faces.  Silence, under such circumstances, would quite properly be interpreted as a display of cowardice and opportunism worthy of Arthur Vandenberg.

We maintain the right to speak the truth but we do not intend to join Michael Moore or other self-promoting celebrities in their “peace” riots, much less to join forces with disgraceful and America-hating leftists like Ramsey Clark.  We do not condemn the decision made by some antiwar libertarians to take part in the leftist antiwar movement.  Though we believe such cooperation is a mistake, those of us who have made such mistakes in the past are in no position to point an accusing finger.

We firmly believe that the President is mistaken, misled by advisors who are either reckless adventurers or pursuing a political agenda that is not in the American interest.  Rhetorical attacks on George W. Bush, his administration, and his party will only serve to deepen and widen the breaches in American political life.  This is a time for constructive dialogue among Americans of good will, not for reciprocal excommunications.

The best thing that could happen, both for the people of Iraq and for the Americans sent to fight this war, would be a speedy American victory followed by a serious reconsideration of U.S. strategy.  A long-term occupation, such as the neoconservatives envision, would only aggravate the serious problems we have already created.  With these two objectives in mind, we shall continue to discuss and deplore the policies advocated by the sinister forces at the Department of Defense, as represented by Paul Wolfowitz and his erstwhile colleague Richard Perle (who is once again working for foreign interests), and we shall continue to advocate an international strategy that acknowledges the independence of sovereign nations and the need for cooperation with the nations of Europe, including Russia.

We reserve our contempt for the little buglers and drummer boys, unleashing the dogs of war from the safety of their web-logs and chat rooms, but we offer our prayers for the American troops and for the people of Iraq.  To the Bush administration, we shall continue to give the friendly advice and constructive (sometimes severe) criticism that is owed by loyal citizens to the government of the country they love.