The Western and Muslim worlds are closer now than they were on Sept. 12, 2001 to the “clash of civilizations” predicted by Harvard’s Samuel Huntington 11 years ago. This is my instinct. If my instinct is right, those in the Muslim world who seek such a clash above all things have reason for self-congratulation, and the Bush administration, whose duty above all things is to serve the national interest of the United States, should know that a major course correction is needed.

My instinct is based on 31 years as an American foreign service officer and ambassador. 20 of those years were spent living in the Muslim world, and since leaving the State Department, I have continued to study and visit the region. In addition to learning two of the region’s languages, I learned the caution – conservatism by another name – that comes from trying to understand complexity.

It was this caution and conservatism that led me to oppose our occupation of Iraq. I did so with regret because I was certain – and events I think have proven me right – that the overthrow of Saddam Hussein would benefit 25 million tyrannized Iraqis. My instinct, however, was that invading a sovereign Muslim country, without international sanction for doing so, would have negative consequences. We now face such consequences.

The president’s foreign policy is not without its successes. He was right to overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan and has established productive relations with Pakistan, Yemen and Saudi Arabia, all key allies in the war on terrorism. American intelligence and diplomacy have eliminated important al-Qaida leaders and induced Col. Gadhafi in Libya to mend his ways.

These successes are overshadowed by wrongheaded approaches on two fronts that have done grave damage to the standing of the United States in the region and lengthened the lines at our enemies’ recruiting stations. In Iraq, it is not yet clear whether the insurgency against our occupation is taking root as a nationalist uprising. If it is, we will indeed be in a quagmire from which a Vietnam-like exit will be our only course.

If it is not, we still face the perception throughout the Muslim world that our occupation is designed to gain us military bases in the region and control of the country’s oil reserves. The Bush occupation of Iraq is fueling growing outrage among ordinary Muslims. This anger makes enemies of people who formerly admired us and undermines the legitimacy of the governments whose support is essential in the struggle against our real enemies.

Iraq has joined Palestine as the second focus of Muslim world anger. President Bush was right to say that a Palestinian state should emerge as part of an eventual peace agreement with Israel. He was wrong to support Prime Minister Sharon as a “man of peace.” He was wrong to condone the building of the wall separating Israel and Palestine. And, having allowed the “road map” for peace he had joined the U.N., the European Union and Russia in proposing, he was wrong to stand by as that plan became dead letter.

Without a renewed U.S. effort to restart the Israel-Palestine peace process, the slaughter of Palestinians and Israelis will continue with no end in sight. New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote on October 24 that Iraqis now call our soldiers “the Jews.” The Muslim world’s view that Ariel Sharon’s iron-fisted tactics in Palestine and ours in Iraq are one and the same has become a conviction and sums up the failure of the Bush administration’s policies in both places.

Others, of course, have instincts as well. Sen. Joseph Biden, the ranking minority member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is quoted in The New York Times Magazine Oct. 17 as having asked Bush what made the president sure that his policies in Iraq were right. The president, Sen. Biden said, replied, “my instincts.”

My instinct about the “clash of civilizations” is based on a lifetime of hard work learning about the Muslim world and using that knowledge, with the caution and restraint that are the diplomat’s stock in trade, to advance U.S. interests. What I have learned allows me to call my instincts “informed.” I do not think the president can say the same of his.

As a foreign policy conservative, I will not vote for President Bush as I did for his father and for President Reagan when I had the honor of being their ambassador. Events in Iraq make it clear that Mr. Bush’s instincts about imposing a new political order by force on a society deeply suspicious of our intentions were wrong and have set back the effort to defeat our most dangerous adversaries.

Sen. Kerry is right in saying that we must repair our time-tested alliances, starting with a conference on Iraq. I am confident that, unlike the president, he would heed John Quincy Adams’ admonition against “going abroad in search of monsters to destroy.” The war on terror is being lost, not won. Sen. Kerry understands this. He will begin the task of rebuilding our alliances and restoring our credibility. My informed instinct is to vote is for him, and I will.

Charles Dunbar of Brunswick was American ambassador to Qatar and to Yemen and now teaches international relations at Boston University.