GEORGIE ANNE GEYER Clark offers antidote to current amorality

WASHINGTON -- When I consider what Gen. Wesley K. Clark's presidential candidacy represents, I think first of his clear moral confrontation with Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic in The Hague -- but I back into the discussion through the evolving reasons given for the Iraq war.
First, we had to attack Iraq because it was the home of Al-Qaida -- if we didn't get them in Baghdad, they'd be on the streets of Des Moines and Salt Lake City. Then the reason evolved to defending ourselves against weapons of mass destruction. When those weren't found, suddenly it was enough to eliminate the horrible dictator. And when we captured Saddam Hussein, the early parts of the proposition were conveniently forgotten and the war had fulfilled its destiny.
Now the Bush administration wants to convince us -- and how unwarily convincible many of us are -- that overthrowing Saddam was what it was about all along. Hail the considered victory!
The Marxist view
Such thinking has historically been called "the ends justifying the means" by Marxists. Only in this administration has this classically un-American idea taken hold, as any means is considered acceptable to further the plans for American "empire" across the world.
Into this new American policy-making position strides Clark, the emerging example of the American individualist who operates on classic American values and remains remarkably clear in his moral and policy presence.
Think, first, of Clark, testifying last week at The Hague against Milosevic when so many American officials would or could not. He made it clear that the former Serbian president was the "guiding force" of the ethnic wars in the Bal-kans and that the Bosnian Serb militias took direction from and reported to Milosevic.
Moreover, the American general said, Milosevic had admitted to him that he knew about the plans of the Bosnian Serbs to massacre Muslims in Srebrenica. Clark told the Bosnian Serb general not to do it, he said, but he went ahead with it anyway.
And yet, because of the many "outs" given him by international law, Milosevic has been able to stand up in the tribunal in The Hague almost every day, acting as his own counsel and thus appearing to be the prosecutor, not the criminal.
In fact, the wily Milosevic is running in absentia for parliament in elections in Serbia. He is not legally supposed to campaign from prison, but apparently gives directions by telephone.
Meanwhile, this American administration has enthusiastically agreed to send Serbian troops to serve alongside American troops in Afghanistan. Incredibly, these are to include troops from the Serbian gendarmerie and the former members of the notorious paramilitary Red Berets, both of whose members were deeply involved in war crimes during the '90s.
Return to tradition
One searches in the intellectual fog and moral obfuscation of both Iraq and the Balkans, for some straight line that would return us to traditional American moral and military principles. That is exactly where I believe Clark comes into the picture.
Nearly alone in the U.S. military during the Balkans wars, Clark warned of the West doing nothing as Milosevic's Serbs savaged the region. Finally, Clark, as supreme commander of NATO, almost single-handedly pushed through the air war to save Kosovo. Many of his military colleagues have criticized him roundly for what amounts to his personal determination to do what is right -- and by the way, to win with remarkably few losses.
For those curious about alternatives to the current Bush neoconservative "ends justify the means" attitude, Clark is a refreshing and workable choice. He would strengthen and use international institutions, repair trans-Atlantic relations, resolve the nuclear challenges of North Korea and Pakistan. Most important, he would employ the weapons of law enforcement rather than warfare in attacking terrorism and focus more on its root causes.
Clark is probably too intellectual, too individualistic and too clear about issues to be elected president. But don't say there's not right in front of us a moral corrective to the amoral policies we are embarked upon.
Universal Press Syndicate