Ex-Marine leader poses hard questions about war

Ex-Marine leader poses hard questions about war BY ADAM PARKER The Post and Courier Within the first days of the invasion in 2003, the U.S. military dropped leaflets in Iraq: "Surrender and be part of the new Iraq." "It was a brilliant success," said Nathaniel Fick, a former Marine commander who participated in that first campaign. Then, as the operation began to heat up, the military dropped "humanitarian rations," which did not include pork or chemical heater packs, which some in Afghanistan had ingested to their great peril. The rations came in bright yellow boxes so they could be seen easily. This won the hearts of many, Fick said. Then the military began dropping cluster bombs, some of which failed to explode upon impact. They came in bright yellow packages, too. "Wires get crossed, with unintended consequences," Fick said. Those consequences - the erosion and eventual loss of trust in American forces and American policy - were the subject of a recent lecture Fick offered College of Charleston students and faculty when he stopped here as part of a book tour. He is the author of "One Bullet Away," a memoir of his experience as a commander in the Marines' elite 1st Reconnaissance Unit. Fick was one of the first to respond to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, as part of the invasion force into Afghanistan, and he helped lead the charge into Iraq about two years later. His book recounts his prewar training and experience in two conflicts as a captain of an infantry platoon. His perspective is said to be unique because he was a Marine who straddled the historical line between pre-9/11 and post-9/11 America. His Dartmouth University education and degree in classics make his an especially articulate first-person account of battle. But Fick is no yes-man. He has harsh words for the Bush administration and its policies in the Mideast as well as for the yellow-ribbon crowd that refuses to question U.S. leadership. "Occupation breeds resentment," he said. "When you have a boot on someone's neck, they don't appreciate it." Fick bemoaned missed opportunities, such as the chance in December 2001 to go after Osama bin Laden in the mountains of Tora Bora after reliable intelligence showed the al-Qaida leader likely was holed up there. But senior brass called off the operation to seal the valleys - the only way out - instead leaving matters in the hands of the Afghan Northern Alliance. Fick said he suspects some improvised negotiating resulted in bin Laden's escape. "Kick the anthill and everyone would scatter," he said. "And they'll never be in one place again." While Fick disparages some of the politics that determine the United States' Iraq policy, he is quick to point out that the Marines fundamentally are apolitical. The military is merely a tool politicians use to get what they want. And in the case of Iraq, it can only set the stage for the Iraqis themselves to rebuild their nation. "Marines set preconditions for political change," Fick said. "The military, however, cannot affect that change." Just because the Armed Forces are apolitical - they follow the orders of the commander in chief regardless of his party affiliation - that doesn't mean they have no politics, Fick said. The military is made up of individuals who are overwhelmingly conservative and predominantly Republican, he notes. "And that's a problem." When most people in an organization share the same view, the world is seen in terms that are too absolute, he said. Fick, who worked with Canadian, British, Australian and German forces, said he had the sense that they were more diverse politically and economically than the U.S. military. This diversity encourages a nuanced interpretation of world events, he said. Still, in the throes of battle, Marines have no time to ruminate on the finer points of political strategies, Fick said. They are focused on the mission and cannot afford distractions. That mission, which was to rid Iraq of weapons of mass destruction and set the stage for democracy, is terribly imperiled for several reasons, Fick said. Perhaps the biggest risk is represented by a largely apathetic public. "People don't care about it because it doesn't touch them," he said. The vast majority of Americans have made no sacrifice or investment in the Afghan and Iraqi wars. Instead of asking them to turn in metal objects to the government or reduce their consumption of gasoline, President Bush merely encouraged more consumerism, Fick said in an interview. "Americans were told to keep shopping!" If you really support the troops, then fight to have the tax cuts repealed or encourage Congress to pass a gas tax, he said. Don't make Americans bleed, he said, make them pay. "What's important to me is that we're not apathetic about it," he said. "I have more sympathy with the anti-war protesters, at least they're involved. My gripe is with the apathetic middle." Fick, whose book and other writings have captured the attention of policymakers, military careerists and citizens alike, said he cannot agree with either of the options now on the table concerning Iraq. To "stay the course" would be a huge mistake. "We're focused almost exclusively on offense, on killing insurgents," he said. Instead, "We must provide concrete, tangible benefits to people in Iraq. In my view, we've done a poor job showing why our system is better than (terror leader) Zarqawi's system." Likewise, Fick blasts those who advocate bringing the troops home now. Iraq could spiral into chaos, he said. The important thing is to empower Iraqis to govern themselves, and that can't be done overnight. What's needed is a radical shift in strategy, one that brings the war home to Americans, encourages the development of alternative energy sources and changes the focus of the conflict away from fighting terrorism (which Fick defines as a tactic, not an enemy) to fighting the causes of terrorism. His book tour has provided him with opportunities to exercise his rhetorical skills and confront some difficult questions posed by readers of "One Bullet Away." Fick said he expected more sympathy from pro-war Republicans and more tough questions from antiwar Democrats, but it's been the exact opposite. Blue-state people seem to be relieved that an ex-Marine, of all people, would speak out against current policy, while red-state folks seem to be less willing to think through the issues, he said. The exception is the military. There, people have been much more willing to listen critically, Fick said, because they are directly affected by the decisions that come from Washington. The future of Iraq is still up in the air, he said. At the lecture, he showed a photograph of a young Iraqi, perhaps 12, kneeling over a box of rations. We are still within that window of time when actions on the ground have not yet established a destiny for this boy, Fick said. Whether he becomes a suicide bomber or a future elected president depends on what the United States and the Iraqis do today. "What will this kid think in 20 or 30 years?" Fick asked his rapt audience. "I think it's still very much in doubt." Contact Adam Parker at aparker@postandcourier.com or 745-5860.

This article was printed via the web on 12/13/2005 12:37:17 AM . This article appeared in The Post and Courier and updated online at Charleston.net on Sunday, December 11, 2005.