Tuesday, September 21, 2004
Kerry/Edwards offer plans for healing Iraq
Editorial
John Kerry and John Edwards delivered a one-two campaign punch Monday that makes the clearest distinctions to date on where they differ with George Bush and Dick Cheney on the war in Iraq. More importantly, the details of these differences go well beyond the hyperactive rhetoric that has often characterized the presidential campaign. Voters who have complained that the candidates never seem to talk specifics should take note.
In his speech at New York University early Monday, Kerry enumerated a four-point plan he would follow in Iraq if he were elected:
• Get more help from other nations.
• Provide better training for Iraqi security forces.
• Provide benefits to the Iraqi people.
• Ensure that democratic elections can be held next year as promised.
The key to success in Iraq will be to "Internationalize" the burden, Kerry said. His running mate Edwards, speaking to the Enquirer editorial board later in the day, detailed what that would mean under a Kerry administration. So far the United States has suffered 90 percent of the casualties and born at least 90 percent of the cost of deposing Saddam Hussein, Edwards said. Those efforts have not yet led to a stabilized Iraq, and they are not likely to do so unless the rest of the world gets behind the effort. Countries such as France, Germany and Russia must be enticed to share the burden of Iraq. To do that, they must be offered the chance to share in the rebuilding of the country.
We agree that the situation in Iraq would be better if a broader coalition were behind the efforts to rebuild the country. We also agree that for Iraq to stand on its own, it must be able to field a capable security force of its own. And we agree that such a security force and the promised free elections of next January are unlikely to come about unless the Iraqi people see that the system offers them real benefits.
We are not yet convinced that Kerry and Edwards are offering the best plans to achieve these goals, but no one can argue that the goals are not worthy. The failure to attract a larger coalition to our cause in Iraq has impeded the war effort and cost the United States much in money, prestige and most importantly, casualties among our brave troops.
Countries such a France, Germany and Russia will be looking for their own benefits in any new coalition. They will expect their companies to participate in and profit from the rebuilding of Iraq. While none of them can be expected to offer up any troops, they can provide great assistance in training, rebuilding the country's shattered infrastructure, and forgiving or restructuring Iraqi debt to get the country's economy back on track. The trick will be for the United States to encourage this help without allowing it to turn into exploitation.
Debate may rage forever over whether we got into Iraq for the right reasons, whether Saddam Hussein posed the most dangerous threat to our security and whether the Iraq war sidetracked us from pursuing those responsible for the attacks of 9/11. But there can be no debate about the facts that the world is a better place without Saddam, or that the United States, now committed in Iraq, has a responsibility to stabilize the country. Both candidates seem to agree that such stabilization is not likely to occur quickly.
The president is scheduled to address the United Nations today on the situation in Iraq. We look forward to hearing an equally detailed plan from him on how this nation can achieve its goals in Iraq.
No presidential campaign turns on one issue. And there are still details that need to be explained on their positions on jobs, taxes, health car and the much broader war on terror.
Edwards offered generalities on most of these subjects while in Cincinnati. He did, however, hint at a specific plan to offer tax breaks to companies that locate in areas where jobs have been lost, such as Ohio. He is expected to unveil the plan in a speech today in Cleveland. We look forward to hearing the details.
What do you think?
What's your opinion of Kerry's proposals? E-mail us at 
