An End To Evil

How to Win the War on Terror

by David Frum and Richard Perle

Published 2003 in the United States

This book is a manifesto for the Bush presidency. When reading it I find myself amazed that the authors are putting some of this in print, and yet I then realize that all manifestos have been put into print before they were executed, be it the Communist Manifesto or Mein Kampf. This is the manifesto of the "New American Right."

As you may or may not know, I published my view of what the war in Iraq was "really about" on the internet in April of 2003 in the document that became the basis for this website, This War is About So Much More. I would never have imagined that a book written by the men perusing the war would be the book to validate my assessment of the war.  

In March 2003 I wrote that:

"This war on Iraq was really designed to be a war on the European Union, OPEC, and the UN as much as a war on Iraq. It was designed to indirectly attack the EU and UN via the Iraqi situation. The three primary goals were to secure American influence in the Persian Gulf, weaken the EU and UN, and gain increased influence over OPEC."

When I made that claim I never imaged that I would ever be able to "positively" prove it, yet this book, written by David Frum and Richard Perle, loudly proclaims it.

This book presents a world consisting of only two types of nations, those that are our friends, and anti-American states whose primary objective is the destruction of the United States for reasons of jealousy or evil will. The continuing message throughout the book is one of immediate threat and the need to take fast action against a world out to destroy America. At times I found myself wondering if the authors are in fact even sane, yet at other times seemingly reasonable points are made, most reasonable if you don't have a knowledge of the history related to the points. The book repeatedly points out "leftist" policy or "leftist" comments, or the actions of "irrational liberals", which are sometimes, very, very tenuously, tied to negative events or policy. It paints a picture of everything over the past 20 years that "could have gone right" if only not for the interference or poor judgment of "the liberals" and bureaucracy, and never acknowledges any negative impacts from "right-wing" leadership, only pointing out times when conservatives have been "too compassionate" for their own good, having tried too hard to please everyone, something which is clear that the authors feel has to stop.

So, what exactly does the book propose?

Quick and decisive action against Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Lybia, urging that "we don't have much time." Strong pressure on Iran, North Korea and China. The challenging of the UN and a possible attempt to breakup the European Union. A total restructuring of almost every American diplomatic or intelligence agency.

In regaurd to Syria they state: "Really, there is only one question to ask about Syria: Why have we put up with it for as long as we have?"

The CIA and FBI, which have had serious problems and have miscalculated and misinterpreted, they accuse of being too liberal, and the measures they propose essentially stem from the claims that the President and his advisors, men like Paul Wolfowitz, don't have enough direct control, and are slowed down by bureaucracy and the desire of these agencies to "proceed with caution."

Most importantly though, in my opinion, is the commentary on Europe and the prospects of a cooperative global community. The authors state that the international Desert Storm experience was "a fluke", and that it would be "highly unrealistic to expect such a thing to ever happen again."  They go on to state:

"We can afford illusions no longer. We have a big mission ahead of us. Let us ready ourselves for the task by examining with clear eyes the roster of our supporters and our opponents, open and disguised."

They also state:

"The United States has long supported European unification. A united Europe, American policy makers believed, would have a stronger economy and could better contribute to the common defense against the Soviet Union."

"The possibility that the integrated Europe we had nurtured for so long might emerge as a 'counterweight' to the United States, particularly on the most sensitive issues of national security, would never have occurred to the Eurocentric American foreign policy establishment."

"So what should we do? These four things.

First, acknowledge that a more closely integrated Europe is no longer an unqualified American interest."

They then go on to state:

"We must do our utmost to preserve our British ally's independence from Europe."

...and on it goes.

This is a book every America should read, and fully understand.

Every one of the points in this book falls directly in line with the statements I have made about the war on Iraq on this website. My assessment of this issue was developed before the war even started, which is proof that the information needed to understand the war was available, however, as of yet, I have still not seen any public acknowledgement of this view on the war, other than this book itself. This entire situation is yet still further proof of the inadequate press and inadequate public debate on these issues. None of the so called "experts" in the media are even close to the issues, and it is the public, left in the dark, who is paying the price.