Bob Novak’s newsletter carries news that former Homeland Security czar Tom Ridge, who last February endorsed Sen. John McCain for President, is critical of the senator’s recent trip to Baghdad during which McCain said that the Iraq capital is safer now than before. Even the initial coverage of the McCain claim was faulted by the media who made abundantly clear that the candidate’s trip to a Baghdad market was possible only because he was backed by a number of U.S. troops and other military backup. From the Novak newsletter:
In a private conference call with supporters of Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) presidential candidacy, Former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge indicated disapproval of the candidate's most recent visit to Baghdad. Ridge, the former governor of Pennsylvania, questioned whether the Baghdad trip was McCain's idea or came from his staff, and received no clear answer. The criticism in Ridge's tone was clear: a strong supporter of Bush's Iraq policy, Ridge endorsed McCain for President on February 28. McCain has come under fire for saying that Baghdad was safer since the U.S. troop surge and then entering the Iraqi capital under heavy security protection, including about 100 troops and two helicopters.
But overall McCain was right, Baghdad is safer for the average citizen—and for dignitaries, too—than it was before the Surge began. Not long ago a Westerner or a high government official was not safe anywhere outside the Green Zone or the compound of a couple of big hotels, even with troop supprt. Now such a person—e.g., McCain—can go out if he is heavily supported. That, believe it or not, is an improvement.
Ordinary Iraqis lead confined lives, too, though not that confined. Their daily existence is unsafe compared to most big cities on Earth, but not as unsafe as in the recent past. The trend, not the exceptions to it, is the point.
McCain’s statement deserves to be taken in this context.
