The Early Hours

The President's address to the nation last night will no doubt elicit partisan banter. But what real substance is there here?

First, Bush has become steadily more subdued in his optimistic presentation of the War on Terror. He talks about "mistakes" in Iraq, 3,000 soldiers giving their lives, and he describes the last five years as "the early hours" of a conflict which he quotes his nemesis (not Chirac, Bin Laden) as calling "World War III". But he maintains his neo-conservative vision of America as a benevolent, almost-all-powerful, and determining force in the world:

We are now in the early hours of this struggle between tyranny and freedom. Amid the violence, some question whether the people of the Middle East want their freedom--and whether the forces of moderation can prevail. For 60 years, these doubts guided our policies in the Middle East. And then, on a bright September morning, it became clear that the calm we saw in the Middle East was only a mirage. Years of pursuing stability to promote peace had left us with neither. So we changed our policies, and committed America's influence in the world to advancing freedom and democracy as the great alternatives to repression and radicalism.

Bush's vision, as clear and clearly controversial as it is, won't be guiding this country much longer. What will the next administration make of this view of our nation? Will it continue to be our manifest destiny to uphold the Pax Americana throughout the 21st century? Or, as I suspect, will each successive president promise disengagement, humility, and benign neglect, only to be drawn into the shrinking, accelerating world that likewise doomed his predecessors?