A Chequer-Board of Nights and Days

Of course, the Democratic Party has very little use for a Scoop Jackson-type like Joe Lieberman anymore, but it is most reassuring to know that Senator Lieberman persists in seeking to serve the country. It would appear that all of his talk about being "independent" wasn't a canard and the longer he remains independent, the better the chances that some form of bipartisan cooperation can take place on the important issues of the day.

It is especially important that Senator Lieberman call his Democratic colleagues to account on the issue of Iraq. Thankfully, he appears to be doing so:

Standing under the grand dome of the Library of Congress on Friday, the three top Senate Democrats bitterly condemned sending more U.S. troops to Iraq, as President Bush is now considering.

"A bad idea," said Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.).

"A huge mistake," warned Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (Ill.).

"Makes no sense whatsoever," fumed Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.).

Across town an hour earlier, at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, Connecticut Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman shared his own thoughts on Bush's plan. "We need an increase in troops there now," he asserted before an audience of military experts and academics. "It must be substantial, and it must be sustained."

Lieberman was sworn in last week as the chamber's one and only "independent Democrat," with the emphasis on "independent." On most issues, including big domestic priorities, he expects to vote as he has for the past 18 years, as a loyal Democrat. But on Iraq, Lieberman is more in sync with Bush than are many Republicans. He is a passionate defender of the war as a death struggle against Islamic terrorism.

The November election swept Republicans out of power in Congress and signaled that voters are deeply unhappy about the course of the Iraq war. The asterisk is Lieberman, who won a fourth term in an antiwar state with strong support from Republican and unaffiliated voters.

That has given Lieberman a mandate to be the man in the middle, an essential player to both parties while beholden to neither. Lately he has dropped the "Democrat" half of his affiliation, describing himself at the Friday event merely as an independent. He even holds out the possibility that he would back a supporter of the Iraq war, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), in the 2008 presidential race -- although his Connecticut colleague, Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D), also may be running.

"I've had a very political two years, so I'm staying out of it for now," Lieberman demurred after his AEI address. "But you know, I'm independent, and I'm just going to watch it develop for a while. I'm going to support who's best for the country. But I wouldn't exclude the possibility" of endorsing McCain.

Bush is considering a temporary increase in U.S. force levels as he prepares to deliver a major speech on Iraq policy this week. Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told the president in a letter Friday that they oppose the idea.

"There is no military solution in Iraq, only a political solution," Reid said. "Adding more combat troops to this civil war undermines our efforts to get the Iraqis to take responsibility for the future."

Lieberman got a hearty laugh at the AEI event when asked to comment on the Reid-Pelosi letter. "Speaking as an independent," he said with a smile, "needless to say, I respectfully disagree."

Bravo. Oh, I imagine that there might be at least a small amount of satisfaction being gleaned for Lieberman from the fact that his Democratic colleagues had turned on him in the aftermath of his primary with Ned Lamont and that now, they must deal with him for another six years. But then again, the Democrats are the ones responsible for causing Lieberman to emphasize the label "independent" for himself.

But most importantly, Lieberman appears to be one of the few Congressional Democrats willing to take the long view regarding the issue of Iraq and the war on terror in general. I hope that his attitude catches on among others in the Democratic caucus but even if it does not, Lieberman renders the invaluable service of splitting the Democrats on the issue of the war. Perhaps this will make it somewhat easier to prosecute it.