Regular readers of this column have learned during the past three weeks about Robert Gates’ views of government gleaned from his recent book, “Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War.” Being something of an optimist, I found inspiration and hope for this country from a man, who, as secretary of defense, was able to wage simultaneous wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and at the same time successfully battle Congress and the Pentagon to at least partial victory over politics and parochial bureaucracy to the benefit of America’s soldiers who were fighting and dying for their country.
Because of these columns a friend gave me a book to read called “America’s Stolen Narrative” by Robert Parry. Parry is an award-winning investigative journalist who has written for both the Associated Press and Newsweek during his 35-year career. His book reframes recent American history from Nixon to the present. My procedure when reading controversial books is to read book reviews and critiques before I read the books. I do this to give me a sense of understanding of the counterpoints to think about. I’m searching for the full story that will give me a sense of balance and moderation. This time I didn’t find any book reviews that refuted Parry’s facts even though it was published in 2012.
Parry’s theme is that Nixon, Reagan, both the Bushes and Robert Gates helped to undermine the political system in a series of what he calls “October Surprises” to swing the vote from Democratic candidates to Republicans just before the general elections in November. When I picked up the book, I was leery about a Democratic tar and feathering of men I greatly respected as public servants: George H.W. Bush and Robert Gates. To my chagrin, the evidence presented tended to undermine my strongly held impressions.
Nixon’s “October Surprise” came during the Vietnam Conflict in 1968 and set the precedent for Ronald Reagan doing his own “October Surprise” in 1980. Nixon contacted South Vietnamese government leader Nguyen van Thieu using Henry Kissinger and Anna Chennault, a member of Nixon’s campaign team, as his intermediaries to destroy the peace process for President Johnson’s Paris peace initiative with the Viet Cong. Doing this would swing the vote in his favor over his Democratic opponent, Hubert Humphrey. Had news of peace in Vietnam come just before the election, it is likely Humphrey would have won the election in a very tight race.
“Both Thieu and Chennault described messages from Nixon’s campaign urging the South Vietnamese to boycott Johnson’s peace talks in the crucial days before the November 5, 1968, election” (P. 52).
President Johnson, who had bugged Nixon’s phones, found out about this chicanery and warned Nixon to back off. The pressure was too great, and Nixon made promises to Thieu that caused the South Vietnamese delegation to refuse to attend the Peace Conference, thus insuring Nixon’s election, but perhaps costing the lives of 30,000 Americans and many thousands of Vietnamese.
Johnson believed that what Nixon had done was tantamount to treason, but he never went public with the information, “for the good of the country” (34). Instead he gave the file to his national security advisor, Walt Rostow, who, during the Watergate Scandal of 1972-73, gave the file to the Johnson Library with instructions not to open the file for 50 years, or longer if the curator so deemed. Because this knowledge had not been revealed, Ronald Reagan, using his allies, George H.W. Bush, Robert Gates and the Israeli government, negotiated with the Iranians to keep the 52 American hostages until after the 1980 elections, in return for war material in their battle against Saddam Hussein. That’s why the hostages were released the day Reagan was inaugurated, according to Parry. Had the hostages been released before the November elections, Carter would probably have won a second term and the history of this nation would have been very different.
Parry’s book was crushing to me, since people I admire and respect – George H.W. Bush and Robert Gates – were shown, under the pressure to get ahead, to have compromised their integrity. As I struggle with these feelings I’ve come to the conclusion that while their actions are inexcusable, flawed men can still do good things for the nation.I certainly believe this is especially the case with Robert Gates and the positive things he did while secretary of defense under both Republican and Democratic presidents. When dealing with humans, flaws and frailty are part of the equation. Seeing only the flaws or only their strengths does not portray the full picture of the individual.
