A Collapse of Faith
Written by Ty Bailey for Sustainable Democracy
Unless you have been living under a rock these last couple of weeks, you should know that the latest National Intelligence Estimate suggests that Iran has suspended their Nuclear Weapons Program. Historically, this report would have cooled tensions between the United States and the Iranian Government, but in today’s culture it does no perceptible good.
The first reason may be due to the report itself which, as is always the case, claims to only be an estimate. It goes on to say that the threat of a nuclear Iran is still a possibility, just not one of immediate concern. But I do not hold that the vague nature of the NIE is the cause for the unrest here in the U.S. I hold that the reason for a lack of consensus is the politicization of the State Department and the Intelligence Community as a whole. For example, currently the right wing of the blogosphere are entrenched in a long running conspiracy narrative about how the State Dept. and CIA are undermining the the President’s policies. Yet, these same people will attempt to defend the very same CIA when it comes to the topics of oversight or war crimes.
Can anyone else see the odd dichotomy within this group? The left is no better.
Back in 2002 the NIE of the time came out and stated that Iraq had WMDs. At the time the above right wing groups trumpeted and held the report high as a vindication for all of their predictions. The left claimed that the Intelligence was cooked and that there was a conspiracy to lead the nation to war. Now, the left holds the report is valid and that the cries of the right are nothing but the moans of sore losers. What happened between 2002 and now that made the left think these reports are more accurate?
My answer to the odd state of the political world when it comes to foreign policy: that neither side of the spectrum cares at all about the validity of any report. Due to the polarization of the voting public, and the politicization of the diplomatic and intelligence community, the Government has lost all credibility.
What we are seeing now is the collapse of the historical default for information, the State. The general media still tries to use the Government findings as valid. One side of the spectrum latches to the media’s reporting as a legitimizing factor to bolster their own argument. The other side of the political debate then points out the complete lack of credibility the State has earned for itself and uses that as a basis for their own stance which becomes equally legitimate to the government.
This degradation of faith in foreign assessment should concern anyone who wishes to have an open republic. If no objective sources exist within the intelligence community, the State cannot act as a legitimate actor in the world. If this continues the polarization of the population will only get worse. The only way to right the course of the ship of State is to implore those in a position of power to appoint political outsiders to key posts. It will require that studies be conducted with the full participation of both sides of the political isle. Only then can the Government regain its stance as a legitimate source.
