No one from the Forward Party responded to my e-mail, so I don't know whether they've read it.
from: [Eric LC]
to: [New York Forward Party], [Forward Party]
date: Mar 11, 2026, 8:00 AM
subject: The Forward Party should reconceive the Iran issue with the premise that we were right on Iraq, which is the truth.
To Craig, Mike, Sam, Erik, Shane, the New York Forward Party community, and the Forward Party at large,
I clarify and relitigate the Iraq issue at Operation Iraqi Freedom FAQ using the law and facts that define the Iraq issue. At Columbia, I catalyzed and co-founded Students United for America, which was a proto-Forward Party on campus, so I have pursued your purpose. I am a New Yorker on the Forward Party mailing list.
For all those reasons, I am writing to you in response to the Forward Party's 05MAR26 e-mail, "War, the Constitution, and Why Congress Must Do Its Job", and 03MAR26 Official Statement on Operation Epic Fury.
The "partisan battles" over Iran reinforce that the pervasive Iraq Syndrome, such as the misguiding "forever war" talking point, has become the operative political and policy context for today's Republicans and Democrats. As such, it is essential for the Forward Party's mission and your challenge to "the two major parties" that you establish the operative context that Operation Iraqi Freedom was justified and a war of necessity according to Richard Haass's taxonomy. Which is the demonstrable truth. In contrast, the Iraq Syndrome is based on a demonstrably false narrative.
The Iraq Syndrome is degenerative and toxic for the Forward Party's advocacy of "America can maintain a strong national defense and be a force for good in the world while honoring constitutional balance. A presidency that respects the law, matched with a Congress willing to act as a co-equal branch of government, strengthens our country, protects our troops, and upholds the rule of law that defines us as a nation." Whereas the 1990 to 2011 Iraq intervention, including OIF, embodies the elements of the Forward Party's platform.
At the dawn of the post-Cold War era, the American-led enforcement of UNSCR 678 was purposely designed as the baseline paradigm for the rules-based post-Cold War liberal international order, particularly to resolve rogue actors like Iran and Saddam's Iraq by upholding the aspirational rules of the reorganized international community. Iraq's mandated compliance with the comprehensive Gulf War ceasefire mandates was the primary test case for "pax Americana". With that essential evaluation of the Iraq intervention in mind, the HW Bush, Clinton, and Bush administrations and Congress conscientiously worked together to enforce UNSCR 678 and related UN resolutions per Public Law 102-190 and related US law. The Iraq intervention set the gold standard for "a president who leads, a Congress that does its job, and a political system that rewards courage instead of silence" and "decisions about war would be debated openly and decided collectively by the representatives of the American people".
However, as the degenerative Iraq Syndrome has pervaded our politics and policy, among its harmful effects, "Presidents of both parties have increasingly used military force without clear authorization from Congress. Meanwhile, Congress has too often avoided the responsibility the Constitution assigns to it." President Trump's Constitutionally messy use of force with Iran follows the precedent of President Obama's Constitutionally messy use of force with Libya. Both messy actions follow the Iraq Syndrome. In order to correct course, to apply a computer analogy, the American 'system' needs to 'revert' to a 'previous restore point' from a healthy 'state' prior to the Iraq Syndrome: On the Iran issue, the Forward Party should hold the President and Congress accountable to the gold standard of Iraq.
Excerpt from the OIF FAQ retrospective #americanprimacy section:
Stigmatizing right normalizes wrong in general. Stigmatizing an epochal paradigmatic right like the Iraq intervention fundamentally reshapes American culture, politics, policy, and leadership with metastatic premise. Clarifying and relitigating the Iraq issue means more than the 4 corners of the Saddam problem, President Bush's legacy, and Operation Iraqi Freedom itself. Since the 1990-2011 UNSCR 660-series compliance enforcement and peace operations with Iraq activated all the elements of American leadership essential to compete for the dominance of pluralistic liberal world order in the geopolitical arena, the current prevailing revisionist narrative stigmatizing the Iraq intervention lays the foundation and sets the frame for a paradigm shift antithetical to American leadership of the free world.
Again, the Iraq Syndrome that has become the operative political and policy context for "the two major parties" is based on a demonstrably false narrative. Therefore, the fundamental step to cure the Iraq Syndrome is clarifying the Iraq issue and relitigating the Iraq Syndrome's false narrative at the premise level of the politics and policy. First for yourselves and the Forward Party's membership, and then to the public at large. That achievement would substantially empower the Forward Party's mission.
The OIF FAQ organizes the dialectical material needed for the task, but I do not have the voice needed to influence the public. The Forward Party has the necessary voice to rehabilitate the operative context versus "the two major parties [who] often treat national security debates as partisan battles instead of constitutional responsibilities". You just need the corrective content to make a difference.
To help clarify the Iraq issue, I recommend the OIF FAQ base post which synthesizes the primary law and fact sources that define the Iraq issue into a coherent narrative form. It is purpose-designed to lay a proper foundation for the Iraq issue.
To help relitigate the Iraq issue, I recommend my Criticism of Hal Brands's commentary on Iraq in Hand-Off: "Reassessing Bush's Legacy: What the Transition Memoranda Do (and Don't) Reveal" for a model rebuttal of a top expert's validation of the Iraq Syndrome. My critical examination of the specious Chilcot report at Critical notes on the UK Iraq Inquiry Chilcot report is useful, too.
Imagine the difference for our politics and policy if the operative context is the public understanding that America was right on Iraq, so that our leaders aspire to the Presidents and Congress's conscientious leadership on Iraq, most of all by President Bush, prior to the degenerative Iraq Syndrome.
To that end, the defining law, policy, precedent, and facts plainly show that President Bush's decision on Iraq was correct. Operation Iraqi Freedom was justified and a vital competitive corrective for American leadership of the free world. In the hard-won constructive wake of the "surge" and "awakening", the United States was enabling post-Saddam Iraq's progressive rehabilitation like we did with post-Nazi Germany and post-Imperial Japan and South Korea while overcoming challenges that dwarf anything we have faced with Iraq. President Obama should have stayed the course from President Bush in accordance with President Eisenhower's cardinal precedent. Instead, President Obama radically deviated to reify the Iraq Syndrome and bring about the damaging consequences that have compounded under President Biden and President Trump.
Today's Republicans and Democrats are both captured by the Iraq Syndrome. Therefore, the essential task to cure America of the Iraq Syndrome is incumbent on the Forward Party. There is no one else to do it. This is why the Forward Party exists.
I invite your critical feedback. If you have questions about my work, please ask.
Related: The international law way to solve rogue actors like Maduro without enabling China is the Gulf War ceasefire formula.
