Skip To Content
Back to Opinion

A Sheep in Wolf’s Clothing

Perhaps Paul Wolfowitz deserved to get pushed out of the World Bank for helping his girlfriend get a new job and a hefty pay raise. At the same time, though, his critics should at least have the decency to admit that the latest scandal disproves the popular (and unfair) claim that Wolfowitz’s main goal in pushing for war in Iraq was to advance the cause of Greater Israel.

How many Likudniks do you know with a “companion” named Shaha Ali Riza?

Whatever you want to say about Wolfowitz, the son of an Eastern European immigrant who lost family in the Holocaust, there appears to be nothing cynical or phony about his belief that American military power and diplomatic action could let loose a wave of democratic reforms in the Islamic world that would improve the lives of the Muslim masses.

And it’s not just the Muslim girlfriend.

In April 2002, at the height of the second intifada, with Israel under sustained attack, Wolfowitz stood in front of a right-leaning pro-Israel rally in Washington, and was booed for declaring that “innocent Palestinians are suffering and dying, as well. It is critical that we recognize and acknowledge that fact.” In an October 2003 speech, he warned that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was hurting America’s standing in the Middle East and could be resolved only through “political means”; he spoke well of the Ayalon-Nusseibeh plan for a two-state solution based on the pre-1967 borders, and praised Israeli and Arab leaders who have made land-for-peace deals, including Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin, Anwar Sadat and King Hussein of Jordan.

It’s hard to imagine Doug Feith or Richard Perle talking like that. In fact, if you’re going to compare Wolfowitz to anyone in the Jewish-Israeli constellation, then the best choice might be Yossi Beilin. Each is reviled — Wolfowitz by opponents of the Iraq War, Beilin by opponents of the Oslo peace process — as a naive idealist whose blueprint for a new Middle East was based on the dangerous fantasy that moderate Muslims commanded enough power to usher in an era of coexistence with the West.

Wolfowitz’s faith in the potential of progressive forces to uplift the Muslim masses dates back at least to his stint in the late 1980s as America’s ambassador to Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim country. “If greater openness is a key to economic success,” Wolfowitz said in his 1989 farewell speech as ambassador, “I believe there is increasingly a need for openness in the political sphere, as well.” Some observers have argued that the speech buoyed the reform movement that eventually brought down President Suharto — and it’s not hard to connect the dots between Wolfowitz’s conclusions about Indonesia and the view that Muslims deserve better than the usual choice in the Middle East between monarchs and strongmen.

Finally, his decision to go to the World Bank suggested a universalist urge to fight poverty across the globe, rather than a dedication to advancing the pro-Israel lobby’s talking points.

Of course, Wolfowitz’s motivation to do the right thing only underscores his tragic failures as an architect of the invasion and reconstruction of Iraq. As Fred Kaplan recently argued in the online journal Slate, Wolfowitz’s main flaw at the Pentagon was that “his inflexible, largely theoretical style of thinking impeded him from detecting when he was wrong or how to make things right.”

“Wolfowitz’s chief failure,” Kaplan wrote, “was a failure of imagination — or at least a failure to step outside his preconceptions (and outside his clique, which shared them) to see if they aligned with reality.”

So, yes, if you must kick Wolfowitz when he’s down, call him arrogant, naive, incompetent — just not Jerusalem’s lackey.

— Ami Eden

I hope you appreciated this article. Before you go, I’d like to ask you to please support the Forward’s award-winning journalism this Passover.

In this age of misinformation, our work is needed like never before. We report on the news that matters most to American Jews, driven by truth, not ideology.

At a time when newsrooms are closing or cutting back, the Forward has removed its paywall. That means for the first time in our 126-year history, Forward journalism is free to everyone, everywhere. With an ongoing war, rising antisemitism, and a flood of disinformation that may affect the upcoming election, we believe that free and open access to Jewish journalism is imperative.

Readers like you make it all possible. Right now, we’re in the middle of our Passover Pledge Drive and we need 500 people to step up and make a gift to sustain our trustworthy, independent journalism.

Make a gift of any size and become a Forward member today. You’ll support our mission to tell the American Jewish story fully and fairly. 

— Rachel Fishman Feddersen, Publisher and CEO

Join our mission to tell the Jewish story fully and fairly.

Our Goal: 500 gifts during our Passover Pledge Drive!

Republish This Story

Please read before republishing

We’re happy to make this story available to republish for free, unless it originated with JTA, Haaretz or another publication (as indicated on the article) and as long as you follow our guidelines. You must credit the Forward, retain our pixel and preserve our canonical link in Google search.  See our full guidelines for more information, and this guide for detail about canonical URLs.

To republish, copy the HTML by clicking on the yellow button to the right; it includes our tracking pixel, all paragraph styles and hyperlinks, the author byline and credit to the Forward. It does not include images; to avoid copyright violations, you must add them manually, following our guidelines. Please email us at [email protected], subject line “republish,” with any questions or to let us know what stories you’re picking up.

We don't support Internet Explorer

Please use Chrome, Safari, Firefox, or Edge to view this site.