Andrew Hagen

George W. Bush has made one of the worst political mistakes of his life in naming Henry Kissinger as chairman of the national commission to investigate the government failures that preceded and failed to prevent the 9/11 attacks. The announcement was made Wednesday. (*) Earlier, it looked like a commission to investigate 9/11 would not be created, due to excessive partisanship. (†) Fortunately, Congress finally authorized an investigation. It did so in Title VI of the recent intelligence budget authorization bill, HR 4628. Regardless of its formal name, there can be little doubt that it will usually be referred to as the “Kissinger Commission.”

Even as Dr. Kissinger, Nobel Peace Prize winner, continues to evade the war crimes tribunal that wants him as a witness, and as possibly a suspect in the investigation of thousands of murders and crimes against humanity perpetrated against the people of Chile in the 1970s at the behest of the US government, when he was President Nixon’s personal vassal, now he is named to serve on the commission that will investigate the worst crime against humanity committed in the 21st century.

The purpose of the commission is to answer why the federal government failed to protect its citizens from the attacks of 9/11. In particular, the commission will produce a report bolstered by evidence that ought to be decisive against those who hold conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attacks. Who believes in those conpsiracy theories? Predominantly, and unfortunately, it is the Left.

Kissinger’s long record of lying to the public and covering up secrets does not bode well for the commission’s credibility. He has made a career of dissembling about the US’s unfortunate role in propping up dictatorial client regimes around the world, from that of Chile’s Pinochet to that of Indonesia’s Suharto. Kissinger starts his work with no credibility with the Left, even when it is certain parts of the Left that the commission most needs to persuade.

I have never flirted with the notion that 9/11 was anything but an unexpected attack by foreign terrorists. With the appointment of Kissinger, the case of the conspiracy theorists is strengthened. Even though it does not provide any positive evidence of any conspiracy, Kissinger’s appointment makes Bush look calculating, cynical, and Machiavellian. It makes people suspicious of him, particularly with regard to Bush’s potential negligence in the months preceding the attacks.

The work has not yet begun. It is entirely within the realm of possibility that the Kissinger Commission will produce a report of outstanding value. There is no doubt in my mind, however, that regardless of the quality of the work, the fact that the commission’s chairman will be Henry Kissinger will irremediably taint it with suspicion. If the commission finds that Bush and his administration did all they could to prevent 9/11, that conclusion will be questioned on the basis that Kissinger, the chairman, is biased and untrustworthy. If the commission finds that Bush or his administration failed in some germane way, that, too, will be questioned perhaps as trying to provide cover for some even worse failure.

My own pet theory is that Bush knows of Kissinger’s bad name among the left-wing, and he just wanted to rub the Left’s face in the fact of the conservative victory at the polls this election cycle. Indeed, there is nothing that progressives can do now to stop Kissinger from taking the helm.

This is a terribly rash decision by President Bush that he will eventually regret. With the formation of this commission, Bush had a chance to put all the ceaseless, vile rumors to rest. Instead, he chooses to put Henry Kissinger in charge of the thing, just to show how powerful he is. Instead of being able to rely on an independent commission to investigate all the evidence fairly, now we as alert, patriotic citizens must have a high degree of concern that we are being lied to. With the appointment of Kissinger, we must now not decrease, but increase the level of scrutiny that we put on Bush and his administration.

Christopher Hitchens vents spleen upon Henry Kissinger in Slate. (‡) Hitchens notes that Kissinger is currently being sued for the murder of Rene Schneider of Chile. Another particularly important charge against him is that under his business concern Kissinger Associates, Henry Kissinger may have ongoing, secret business dealings with Gulf oil oligarchies. Can there be any doubt that Kissinger is a business partner with the Saudis? This is the man that is supposed to investigate 9/11? Kissinger’s conflicts of interest gape like an open maw.

The New York Times finds that Kissinger’s supposed biggest strength—being an insider—is in fact his biggest drawback. The Times editorializes that it is

tempting to wonder if the choice of Mr. Kissinger is not a clever maneuver by the White House to contain an investigation it long opposed.

It seems improbable to expect Mr. Kissinger to report unflinchingly on the conduct of the government, including that of Mr. Bush. He would have to challenge the established order and risk sundering old friendships and business relationships.

(§) While the Times may delve too deeply into the probability of expectations, it makes the important point that even if all the evidence of Kissinger’s crimes is rejected, with his insider relationships, Kissinger is the right man for the wrong job.

David Corn surprises me with a useful article in the post-Hitchens Nation. “Asking Henry Kissinger to investigate government malfeasance or nonfeasance is akin to asking Slobodan Milosevic to investigate war crimes.” (**) Corn goes on from there to make a strong, detailed case about why Kissinger cannot be trusted, especially in this role.

Finally, the Guardian sums it all up. (††)

There has been a long-standing need for an independent commission to investigate what the government did wrong when it failed to prevent the 9/11 attacks. With the creation of the Kissinger Commission, there is still a need for such an independent commission.

This entry was posted on Friday, November 29th, 2002 at 18:38 and is filed under 9/11. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.