The case for voting for Bush
John Kay in today's FT makes what an interesting case for voting for Bush (aside from the amusement factor), which is the 'chickens coming home to roost' angle.America is engaged in a bold, ideologically motivated experiment, in defiance of conventional wisdom about international affairs and economic policy. If it succeeds, its architects deserve their political success, and there will be important lessons for us all. If it fails, which seems to me much more likely, it is important that the connection between policy initiatives and their consequences should be obvious both to those who opposed this course of action and to those who favoured it. If there is a change of administration, there will certainly be another neo-conservative experiment, and the myth of Democratic betrayal will fuel it.
Where Kay errs I think is in believing that a 'neo-conservative' foreign-policy still has a chance of working. Much of the their beliefs have already been proven wrong - there were no flowers to greet the invasion force, there is not a major square named after President Bush, the Americans could not do it with a small number of troops, allies would have been useful, it has not set off a democratic revolution etc. If somehow everything turns out alright in the end it probably have little to do with them, instead it will have much to do with America's traditional foreign policy strengths, such as a effective diplomacy, a large army, international support, using the UN etc.