Ron Nessen references an analysis by Michael Rubin of the somewhat infamous (to liberals and pacifists) American Enterprise Institue, a (neo)conservative thinktank and reflects that, “This think tanker’s balanced, thoughtful, first-hand account of what’s really going on in Iraq is like a fresh breeze blowing away the heavy smog of negativity we usually hear.”

While I think the reasons for our going to war and the sequence of actions that led us there will be hotly debated for some time to come, I similarly think that people perceive our progress (or lack thereof) in the terms most comfortable (or advantageous) to them. For my part, I wouldn’t be surprised if Rubin’s accounting of the economic situation in Iraq were quite accurate. But when offset against the near total uncertainty about short- to medium-term foreign policy planning (and even goals) in Iraq on the part of America right now in terms of troop commitments and foreign aid, I think pieces like Rubin’s and thankful commentary like Nessen’s highlight just how difficult a balancing act is occurring on a daily basis. Could this economic growth be sustained in the face of a unilateral pullout of U.S. troops? If not, how do we intend to undertake a phased withdrawal, and how long will it take? What are our hopes and expectations for the rate of growth vs. sustainability of the Iraqi economy and democratic institutions? How about our own?

Bottom line: war is a destabilizing factor, and I don’t think we yet know a single best pracitce for restabilizing in the aftermath. But, for that matter, in the face of so much political polarization in American and the world, I don’t think we know best practices for much of public policy at all…

This post was written by Freddie