Michael Gerson: Hello, my name is Mike Gerson. I’m a contributor at Newsweek, a columnist at the Washington Post and a Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. I’ve written a new book called Heroic Conservatism, and I’m happy to take your questions. _______________________
Madison, WI: How can we begin drawing lessons from a war that is still ongoing? And how will the way in which the war ends change what we draw from it?
Michael Gerson: Most of the lessons I draw are from the first few years of the war – and even without knowing the outcome, I think we can start to learn something. I make the case that “regime destruction” is relatively easy, given America’s military capabilities. But “regime change” may involve an extensive effort of nation-building, for which America is not particularly prepared or suited. This kind of effort – particularly while fighting an insurgency – is not impossible. But it is difficult. _______________________
Redmond, WA: What was your inspiration for writing this book? Why was this a compelling subject for you and what did you think you contribute to our discussion of conservatism and the President?
Michael Gerson: I wrote this book because I see a backlash, particularly among Republicans, against some ideals and causes I deeply believe in. I think it is possible to be an economic conservative – and also believe in fighting AIDS and malaria in Africa. I believe it is possible to be a social conservative – and also believe that America must do more to address issues of race and poverty here at home. I think it is possible to learn some hard lessons from the last few years of American foreign policy – and still remain engaged and active in opposing global threats and global suffering. My goal is to make the case for idealism in a tired time.
Chesterfield, MO: How do you see the Iraq War playing out in the George W Bush legacy? Ten or 20 years from now, what do you think we will draw from it?
Michael Gerson: Presidential legacies are very difficult to determine without the distance of years, sometimes decades. Harry Truman, with the nation exahusted from World War II, was forced by history to begin the Cold War, defend Greece and Turkey, undertake the Marshall Plan and fight a stalemated and unpopular war on the other side of the earth (Korea). He left office widely unpopular with Americans. But the cause he undertook – the Cold War – turned out to be right and necessary. And history has treated him well.
President Bush also leads a tired nation, during an unpopular war. Much will depend on the outcome of that war, which is up in the air (improving, but still uncertain). Much will also depend on a historical judgment: Is the war on terror right and necessary?
Arlington, VA: In the section of your book in Newsweek this week, you speak very admirably of President Bush. Which other politicians do you admire? Why?
Michael Gerson: Well, my book, Heroic Conservatism, features an odd selection of heroes. I have great respect, of course, for Lincoln, for his deep commitment to universal ideals of human rights and dignity. But I also praise William Jennings Bryan, the three-time Democratic nominee for President, who brought a religious passion to the cause of the common man. I deeply admire the late governor of Pennsylvania, Bob Casey, who combined a pro-life stance with a vision of social justice for the poor.
Oyster Bay, NY: Do you think conservatism is particularly under attack today? Why or why not?
Michael Gerson: I think conservatism is engaged in an important debate about its own definition. Just about every Republican candidate in the race is attempting to establish their conservative credentials by talking about cutting government and spending.
I don’t support big, bureaucratic government. But I think a purely anti-government message is too narrow. Conservatism must offer its own answers on issues from poverty, to global warming, to needless suffering abroad. It needs to engage in a contest of ideas on these issues, or fade into irrelevance.
Houston, TX: You write about what lessons we shouldn’t learn from Iraq. Would you say any large mistakes were made in this war and, if so, what were they? The majority of the American people seem to think so.
Michael Gerson: I guess I am part of the majority. I try to deal with this issue honesty in the book. I make the case that there were errors of planning that allowed chaos in Baghdad after the invasion to become a habit … errors of military strategy that undermined an effective counter-insurgency approach … and also that while needed adjustments in strategy eventually came, they came late.
But I also argue that if the lesson we draw from Iraq is that the world is too complicated for America act in its interests – if we retreat into paralysis and isolation – the consequences could be terrible. The globalized threats we face – from terrorism, to proliferation, to drug and crime gangs, to disease – need to be energetically confronted.
Dayton, OH: Did Republicans get the man they expected in George W. Bush or have they been as disappointed and disillusioned by him as have so many others?
Michael Gerson: Some Republicans make exactly this criticism – that they voted for a conservative, and got a pro-immigration, big spender.
I think the criticism is unfair. Bush campaigned in 2000 in favor of a prescrition drug benefit in Medicare – and delivered a prescrition drug benefit in Medicare. That shouldn’t have been a surprise to conservatives. His No Child Left Behind education reform was the centerpiece of his campaign. Conservatives can’t be shocked at that, even if they have problems with the law. Much of the spending increases after 9/11 were for the military and homeland security. That seems pretty conservative to me.
Michael Gerson: Thank you all for the good questions.
