« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
McCain Adviser's Horrifying Iraq Track Record: Will the Press Notice?
Over the weekend, The New York Times noted that some of John McCain's foreign policy advisers from the "realist" camp are uneasy with the amount of influence enjoyed by neoconservatives like Randy Scheunemann, who's been serving as McCain's chief foreign policy aide and spokesman.
But it isn't only his internal rivals who have reason to worry about Scheunemann. Not only does he have McCain's ear, he also has a track record of being consistently wrong on the major foreign policy question of the day -- Iraq. Of all the hawkish Washington foreign-policy types pushing both before and after 9/11 for war with Iraq -- a war that an overwhelming majority of Americans now considers a mistake -- Scheunemann, though not a marquee name, was among the most energetic and influential. And in the invasion's aftermath, he consistently opposed steps that might have helped stabilize the country.
And yet, the political press has largely given McCain a pass on the fact that his top foreign policy adviser was at the center of perhaps the biggest strategic folly in our history.
Here, to refresh reporters' memories, is the rundown on Scheunemann's Iraq record:
- As a top aide to then-Senate GOP leader Trent Lott, Scheunemann helped draft -- and acted as a driving force behind -- the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act (ILA), which essentially made "regime change" the official Iraq policy of the US. The Act was cited as a key basis of support in the fateful 2002 Congressional resolution authorizing military force, and directly paved the way for President Bush's invasion.
- Scheunemann was a board member of Bill Kristol's Project for a New American Century, which played a major role in agitating for the war. Scheunemann signed Kristol's influential letter to President Bush, sent nine days after 9/11, which asserted that failing to respond to the Al Qaeda attack by going after Saddam would "constitute an early and perhaps decisive surrender in the war on international terrorism." Scheunemann also served as a "consultant" to Donald Rumsfeld's Pentagon while it was planning the war. And in late 2002, Scheunemann, with administration approval, founded the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq (CLI), an advocacy group with the explicit goal of whipping up pro-war sentiment across the country.
- Scheunemann was a crucial Washington backer of Ahmad Chalabi, the now-disgraced Iraqi exile who helped feed the CIA false intelligence on Saddam's WMD program and has since been accused of giving US state secrets to Iran. In the years leading up to the invasion, the two were so tight that the spokesman for Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress shared a Washington address with both CLI and Scheunemann's private lobbying firm and Scheunemann was mentioned in press reports as a candidate for the job of formal envoy to the Iraqi opposition. During this period, Scheunemann, who acted as a crucial link between Chalabi and John McCain, was a go-to guy for reporters seeking pro-Chalabi quotes. He told The New York Times that Chalabi possessed "tremendous attributes that would be of immeasurable benefit to an Iraq in transition to democracy" and separately called him "an Iraqi patriot."
- Like other war supporters, Scheunemann threw caution to the wind in declaring, wrongly, that Saddam had WMD. "There is no doubt Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction," he assured Americans a month before the invasion.
- Scheunemann also played a key role in lining up support for the invasion from the "Vilnius Ten," a group of former Soviet bloc countries seeking to gain entry to NATO, some of whom Scheunemann has worked as a paid lobbyist on behalf of. With his partner Bruce Jackson, a Lockheed Martin executive, Scheunemann reportedly gave assurances to the Ten that backing the invasion would help their chances for NATO membership. Ultimately, seven of the ten countries gained entry to NATO, and two of those, Romania and Latvia, employed Scheunemann as a paid lobbyist to promote their applications.
- In the invasion's aftermath, Scheunemann's judgment proved no more effective. He argued vociferously against giving the UN a significant role in stabilizing Iraq. And he also opposed leaving any members of Saddam's Baath party in government positions, declaring: "It is very difficult for me to conceive of democratic institutions being established in Iraq with the Baathist power structure mostly intact." Both of these positions, of course, proved to be disastrous policy blunders, which badly damaged our ability to stabilize Iraq in the crucial early months.
It's kind of astonishing that McCain continues to be taken seriously on Iraq when his closest adviser has a track record on the issue as atrocious as Scheunemann's. At the very least, when reporters hang up from their frequent conference calls, arranged by the McCain campaign, in which Scheunemann attacks Barack Obama's judgment on Iraq, they might want to keep Scheunemann's own history on the subject in mind.
Late Update: We wrote above, based on a 2004 report in The Los Angeles Times, that the spokesman for Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress shared a Washington address with both CLI and Scheunemann's private lobbying firm. But Entifadh Qanbar, who worked for the INC at the time, told TPM that Scheunemann took over the office space from the INC when the INC moved into new digs.





Comments (18)
So then Scheunemann is the malfunctioning Brain behind the mouth of McCain as regards Iraq. That explains a lot about McCain's "surge mentality" now doesn't it?
The PNAC connection makes perfect sense, in retrospect. They've all been so widely discredited (but why do people still listen to Kristol?) that it appears their only hope of selling their bag of goods is to validate Iraq by means of the "surge" (as however they wish to define it.) I couldn't understand why they'd be winding up McCain and letting him go this long on the "surge" when 87% say the economy is issue one. Now it makes a little more sense -- it's not about McCain, it's about their political survival. It appears that McCain is another willing low-information Republican that is being used by the same creeps that hijacked the Republican party, and by extension, US foreign policy. One wonders at what point in the last decade McCain decided that working with those guys was a good idea.
This election is VERY MUCH about "judgement."
July 28, 2008 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
The list also sounds like McCain's actions as well. It's no wonder he's in McCain's circle, he's a primary influence on McCain. The press will never wake up this election.
July 29, 2008 5:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Win, loose or draw, one thing is certain. Kristol's "New American Century" won't make it a quarter.
That's what happens when Monday morning quarterbacks with nothing to do all day but plot and plan, suddenly get to call the shots.
Oh well. There are other countries and their will be other centuries.
July 28, 2008 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
probably a nothus cassandra
July 28, 2008 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Scheunemann - as wrong as he was, is and will be - isn't the issue, and won't be an issue with the media. McCain - as wrong as he was, is and will be - is the problem and should be the topic of analysis. If McCain's history of error is getting little attention, do you think anybody is going to pay attention to Scheunemann?
July 28, 2008 8:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I say again, very patiently: why is nothing known about Scheunemann pre-1986? Birthdate and place, education, marital status: all are secret. It's like David Addington three years ago, right down to the beard.
Is there something he wants to hide? Will McC's people not provide the info? Are you not asking for it?
July 28, 2008 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
that is curious, isn't it?
Any thoughts on why?
July 28, 2008 9:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
good reporting. is there any way to mail this around to the Washington Post or NYT or LA Times? this is the kind of journalism they would be doing if they properly understood the civic duties of their organizations, and it's the kind of thing the American people need to know about the candidates.
July 28, 2008 8:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
penalcolony...you're right, that's weird. I borrowed John McCain's personal computer and used the Goggle and I can't find a thing on Randy before 1986, other than it appears his middle initial is "J". At least that's the only Randy Scheunemann who pops up in DC or Virginia. No bio, no alma mater, no birth date, no favorite color, nuttin'. Odd.
July 28, 2008 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
The other troubling thing is that the Post has been utterly silent on any actual McCain campaign reporting. Fake news and opinion/hit pieces-disguised as analysis they do all the time, but actually putting a microscope on the geezer, forget it. I thought I read somewhere that a total rookie is supposedly covering McLame's campaign, while a Pulitzer-winner is covering Obama. True?
You know, the op-ed page has been conservative tripe ever since Fat Freddie Freeloader was given the journalistic sinecure of a lifetime, but the reporting was pretty good except for the boob Solomon. But ever since they hired the WSJ d00d, the reporting is starting to take a turn for the worse. At least to these tired eyes.
July 28, 2008 10:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Semi-interesting six degrees of seperation between George Soros, John Bolton and Randy Scheunemann.
National Review 5/21/05 Vol. 37 Issue 21:
July 28, 2008 10:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
NationalJournal, not Review
July 28, 2008 10:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Remarks from Scheunemann in 2001 disparaging the CIA for its inability to, as Cheney would say, work on the dark side. He suggests that in the wake of the 9/11 attacks the US should reverse its ban on political assassinations and recruit human rights violators if they can combat the terrorist threat.
Intelligence first: CIA policy and practice must be reformed
Oh and he also mentions taking out Saddam Hussein a few times.
July 28, 2008 11:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Are we not all slack-jawed, fly catchingly open mouth astonished that we read the PNAC war plan on the internet, then it's promoters and shapers stole the White House, riddled the government from top to bottom with apparatchiks in Rovian style, fabricated boogeymen under our children's beds to send death and destruction to the doors of those who would block a U.S. corporate petro grab the likes of which is unprecedented?
Justice won't look into anything. Congress puts impeachment and sharply worded letters in the mail...
Man.
Jesus.
July 29, 2008 12:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Back in 1995 i was trading stocks, and came across an interesting news item about Halliburton that gave their stock a bump. They had signed what was called a "strategic agreement" with the guy that was famous for putting out the Oil fires in the first Gulf War. On reading it, i looked to my housemate that was standing next to me and said "if the Republicans get the White House back next year, we're going to war in Iraq." As we know, Dole lost and we didn't. The following election the Republicans took it back, and of course we went to war in Iraq.
Here for nostalgia's sake is the press release for it: http://www.halliburton.com/news/archive/1995/hesnws_102495.jsp
July 29, 2008 12:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Just another Israeli plant in the US Foreign Policy apparatus.
July 29, 2008 8:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
A PROPOSAL FOR SERIOUS, REAL LOBBYING REFORM!!
This article, and the associated comments, reinvigorate the need for REAL lobbying reform, to limit the scope of lobbyist influence. The measures which are typically advanced in Congress are nice....as a start. But they are really just window dressing, that merely nibbles around the edges. Real reform can only be achieved by comprehensive, structural changes, which, naturally, will encounter serious opposition from stakeholders with vested interests. But that is the irony of lobbying reform: lobbyists are currently sufficiently influential to quash it. One proposal for serious, meaningful reform that deserves consideration -- or at least will catalyze discussion of other serious reforms -- can be found on the Bipartisan Bridge website (www.BipartisanBridge.org). The particular proposal, which is accompanied by ideas for Congressional reform in general, is located at: http://www.bipartisanbridge.org/S1C2.html
July 30, 2008 3:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the link to BIPARTISAN BRIDGE.
Its all good.
July 30, 2008 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink