Fair-weather voters

Across the world last weekend, demonstrators gathered to protest the proposed US war against Iraq. Some people are sure that war against Iraq is the wrong thing to do. Others, many of them currently residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, are sure that war against Iraq is the right thing to do. The vast majority of the American population is stuck in the only position that really makes any sense: they aren't sure. And since this is a democracy, it's the majority that matters.

The popularity of this war will be determined not by what people think now, but by what happens once the war starts. It's easy to forget now, but what people now remember as the crowning moments of American glory -- victory in the Revolutionary War, victory after World War I, victory after World War II, weren't popular in 1776, 1916, or 1938. Woodrow Wilson won the 1916 election on the platform that he would keep the US out of war in Europe. Likewise Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1938 acted similarly in regard to World War II. It took Pearl Harbor to convince the US to enter declare war against Japan, and even then it did not declare war on Germany (Germany declared war on the US first). Some even argue that FDR knowingly let Pearl Harbor happen in order to get the US into the war.

Only about a third of colonial America was in favor of going to war with Britain over taxation without representation. Another third was pro-British, and the rest were caught somewhere in the middle. Most of the world gave the United States no chance against the British Empire. But after it all worked out so well, people started jumping on the bandwagon, and the Revolutionary War attained its privileged place in US history.

In the mid-teens and the early '40s, Americans sat and watched as European nations bludgeoned each other on the continent. Most Americans were more than happy to let the Europeans have at it and stay out of the mess themselves. But despite their ambivalence at the onset of these wars, the American people were quick to jump on the bandwagon once the war effort was underway. Soldiers fought bravely and society and industry were transformed into a war machine.

Each World War added immensely to US power, prestige, and influence. Moreover, the consequences of Germany winning either war are frightening. After World War II, the United States held more power than any nation in world history. Despite being pushed into World War II, Americans were very glad to have entered into it once it was over and won.

The last war in Iraq followed the same script. The public was divided on whether or not to go to war, if not slightly opposed to the idea. But once American aircraft started exploding Iraqi tanks live on CNN, with minimal US casualties, everyone agreed it was a good idea. Bush's popularity soared. Only very few people on the far left question the righteousness of that war today. In fact, most consider America's only mistake to have been not finishing off Saddam while they had the chance.

The war in Vietnam started with similar ambivalence from the public. The public was generally uninformed and unsupportive. Once the war started going badly, the public became more informed, and also more unsupportive. Unsuccessful wars are unpopular. But if the war had gone well, there is no doubt voters would have been ecstatic about it.

Is the current war in Iraq a good idea? If the military runs into problems, and we're caught there for years, voters will look back on an administration that was careless in its use of military might, and insensitive to the public's concerns. In that case, war against Iraq is a bad idea. But if we can win it easily, voters will agree that it was always an outstanding idea and only radical leftists were ever opposed to the war. They hemmed and hawed, but the real Americans were always in favor of action against Iraq. Successful wars are never unpopular.

The point is, it's not principles that matter to American voters (or any voters, I would guess), it's results. Which is why no matter how hard the left protests, no matter how many doubts are raised over the threat posed by Iraq or the connection between Iraq and al Qaeda, it will be the outcome of the war, not its circumstances, that determine its place in the opinions of the American people.

The obvious problem is that we don't yet know whether the war will be successful or unsuccessful. Which is why any reasonable person has to be unsure about whether the war is a good or a bad idea. So is George W. a modern-day Lyndon Johnson, pushing the country into an interminable conflict which saps US strength for years? Or is German leader Gerhard Schroder, opposed to war in Iraq, a Neville Chamberlin, appeasing a belligerent power for the sake of peace? Only time will tell.