The ideals of the neocons have been deflated by continuing difficulties in Iraq

Moises Naim argues in the Sept/Oct 2004 issue of Foreign Policy that neoconservative ideals have suffered greatly from the debacle in Iraq as a result of massive intelligence failures, apparent misunderstanding of the situation in the country prior to invasion, continuing failures of analysis and evaluation of the situation on the ground, and the failure to resolve a peaceful situation once the apparent 'major combat operations' were over.

Naim argues that the neoconservative agenda, that has included the pre-eminence of military solutions to diplomatic solutions has proven ineffective and in some cases defective, "harkens back to the Cold War." The mindset of the leadership of the Bush administration has been to respond to the terrorist threat with the old Cold War paradigm. The neocons attacked not only Afghanistan, but also Iraq, returning to the decades old theory that nation-states are responsible for the acts of their citizens. Certainly Afghanistan was a legitimate target because it was so directly allied with al Qaeda, however Iraq was another issue entirely--it more resembled the communist states with which most of this administration has been accustomed to dealing. We have entered a new era of international conflict in which attacks are conducted by organizations that are independent of state sponsorship, and this new era requires a new way of thinking about international relations--something that the Bush administration may not be capable of doing.

I recommend this brief commentary from one of the editors of Foreign Policy.