http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?p=332#more-332 Chronicles Online, Wednesday, September 19, 2007 THE PRESIDENTS ROAD TO NOWHERE by Srdja Trifkovic Last Thursday President George W. Bush delivered a major speech on Iraq, after weeks of carefully orchestrated White House campaign that sought to shift the terms of debate about the war in his favor. Delivered in the stern tone of a sub-headmaster aware of the breakdown of discipline, Mr. Bush's speech merely confirmed what we have known for years: that he has no strategy for ending the war, and no ability, or willingness, to devise one. He confuses transient tactical successes of the surge with strategy, and fails to grasp that military efficiency is merely the precondition for political creativity. Four and a half years after he plunged into his Iraqi adventure, Mr. Bush is still staying the course. . . to nowhere. The President opened with the assertion that, in Iraq, an ally of the United States is fighting for its survival. He asserted that terrorists and extremists who are at war with us around the world are the same as Prime Minister al-Malikis domestic foes: their goal is to dominate the region, and attack us here at home. If Iraqs young democracy can turn back these enemies, it will mean a more hopeful Middle East and a more secure America. This ally has placed its trust in the United States. And tonight, our moral and strategic imperatives are one. The claim that Iraq is Americas ally that has placed its trust in the United States, is ridiculous: A comprehensive BBC/ABC News poll released last week shows that in two key areassecurity and the conditions for political dialogue, reconstruction and economic developmentmore than two thirds of Iraqis say the U.S. surge has made things worse. Since last February, the number of Iraqis who think that US-led coalition forces should leave immediately has risen sharply, from 35 to 47 percent. Furthermore, 85 percent of Iraqis have little or no confidence in US and allied forces. These results will make grim reading for a country that is supposed to be a young democracy allied to America. In addition, sixty-one per cent of Iraqis say they have little or no confidence in the national government, and exactly two-thirds disapprove of Nouri al-Malikis handling of the job of prime minister. As the BBC commentator has noted, The Bush administration will no doubt be deploying many statistics and examples to argue that there have been security improvements in the last six months, as well as some glimmers of political progress, that mean the surge should be given more time. And administration supporters may argue that there is bound to be a lag between actual events on the ground and public perceptions of them. But in the war of nerves that continues in Iraq, perceptions and public opinion are critical elements. The surge was meant to provide a breathing space in which political progress could make headway. This survey suggests that the public atmosphere in which any political reconciliation must take place remains hugely challenging. In other words, Iraqs allied population heartily loathes the helper no less than the Czechs loathed their Soviet rescuers from the clutches of counter-revolution in August 1968. But the notion of an alliance with a predominantly Muslim country has been a Washingtonian pipe-dream for decades. At all times at has rested on wishful thinking, ideological schemes devoid of empirical basis, and plain ignorance of the Muslim mindset. The President invoked the testimony of General David Petraeus to Congress to assert that conditions in Iraq are improving, that we are seizing the initiative from the enemy and that the troop surge is working. It was noteworthy, however, that he had replaced the goal of victory, advanced in his previous speeches, with that of success in his latest address. He paid a tribute to an Iraqi government that has decided to take on the extremists and should now proceed to achieving reconciliation. Only one day later, however, and with no pomp, the White House issued a new report which stated that the government of Iraq had made almost no progress in achieving stability and reconciliation across the countrys ethno-sectarian divide. The report suggested that in previous two months Prime Minister al-Maliki and his team had made headway on only two of the 18 stated benchmarks for political progress. The assessment further validated the findings of the National Intelligence Report announced last August and the Government Accountability Office report published on September 4. In addition, the Independent Commission on the Security Forces of Iraq, headed by retired Marine Gen. James Jones, determined on September 6 that the Iraqi army cannot yet meaningfully contribute to denying terrorists safe haven. All four studies flatly contradicted Mr. Bushs claim that political progress was being made to match military improvements. The highlight of Mr. Bushs speech was his announcement that 21,000 American soldiers would be withdrawn by next summer. He failed to mention that those troops would have to be withdrawn anywayunless he were to extend deployments of units due for rotation, which would be politically disastrous. If effected, the announced withdrawal would merely bring the number of American soldiers in Iraq back to the pre-surge level of last January. But since the target of his speech was not so much his Democrat opposition as the Republicans weary of the war, the Presidents domestic objective may have been attained. The promise of even partial pullout has bought him another six months with several wavering GOP Senators, and he needs to hold the support of only 34 of them to sustain a presidential veto of any unwanted mandates Until next spring at least, the Democrats wont be able to muster enough Republican votes to break a Senate filibuster and pass legislation that would impose a withd rawal timetable. Buying more time is meaningless in the absence of a strategy to end the warand Mr. Bush has none. He is staying the course to nowhere. His last attempt at devising a coherent strategy, as presented last January, treated the military surge as a tactical device to buy time for the Iraqi government to achieve reconciliation and bridge sectarian divides. That expectation had always been the weak link in his plan. It postulated the favorable development of a known unknown that is, and has always been, outside American control. According to Mr. Bushs own standards, which were established when the surge was announced, the strategy has failed: Iraqs collapsed society has been unable to develop institutions and mechanisms capable of bridging ethno-sectarian divides. A rare moment of technical accuracy in Mr. Bushs address came when he said that the vision for a reduced American presence . . . has the support of Iraqi leaders from all communities and that American engagement will extend beyond his presidency. The former has been true ever since the occupation began. The latter is inevitable since Mr. Bush is both unwilling and unable to contemplate a plan that would enable the United States to start disengaging before January 2009. On current form, as per Gen. Petraeus, we shall need five to ten years for Iraq to be stabilized enough that U.S. forces may withdraw. Iraq is with us to stay, then, and even after Bush a hasty withdrawal would be neither prudent nor moral. American interests are threefold: to disengage without appearing utterly defeated, to leave behind the least undesirable status quo by separating warring factions into three self-governing units, and to counter as much as possible the advantage gained by Americas rivals and enemies. In particular, the creation of an anti-Shia, anti-Iranian, nationalist Sunni-Arab entity in central and western Iraq would be the best possible bulwark to Ahmadinejads intention to create a Tehran-dominated belt that would extend over Iraq and Syria to the Hizballah-controlled redoubt in southern Lebanon. Mr. Bush has warned that if we were to be driven out of Iraq, extremists of all strains would be emboldened and the country would face a humanitarian nightmare. Of course the quagmire is of his own makingIraq gave a boost to al-Qaedas propaganda, recruitment and fundraising and provided a targeting and training area for terroristsbut a hasty withdrawal would indeed turn the current disaster into catastrophe. His successor will inherit the moral obligation to the people of Iraq to make amends for his predecessors criminal folly by managing disengagement in the least harmful manner possible. In addition, an obvious humbling of America by the combined efforts of al-Qaeda, the Badr Brigades, Muqtada al-Sadrs Mahdi Army et al would do wonders for the jihadist cause world wide. The Presidents reiterated vision of a free Iraq, critical to the security of the United States, which will deny al-Qaida a safe haven, counter the destructive ambitions of Iran, an anchor of stability in the region, and our partner in the fight against terror, is unattainable. Devising a viable disengagement strategy demands discarding the illusion that Iraq can be a democracy as well as an American ally. Yes, said Austrian Emperor Franz II, on being told that a certain gentleman was a patriot, but is he a patriot for me? When praising democracy in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East, Mr. Bush should ask himself if the projects actual or potential beneficiaries are democrats for us. Iraq can be ruled as it had been ruled before March 2003, and as the bulk of the Arab world is still ruled today: as an autocracy, with occasional sham elections perhaps, but with a firm hold of the security services on the political life always. Such an Iraq could indeed be a partner of sorts, like the Hashemites in Amman or Hosni Mubarak are American partners. A free Iraq, on the other handfree from American military presence, and with the ruling political elite representative of the will of the majority of its citizenswill either disintegrate into three monolithic ethno-religious entities, or else it will become a Shiite-dominated theocracy closely allied with its neighbor across the Shat-al-Arab, with Sharia as the law of the land. Dr. S. Trifkovic, Foreign Affairs Editor CHRONICLES: A Magazine of American Culture http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/?cat=4 www.trifkovic.mysite.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] =============== Group Moderator: [Е-ПОШТА ЗАШТИЋЕНА] page at http://magazine.sorabia.net for more informations about current situation in Serbia http://www.sorabia.net Slusajte GLAS SORABIJE nas talk internet-radio (Serbian Only) http://radio.sorabia.net Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sorabia/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sorabia/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[Е-ПОШТА ЗАШТИЋЕНА] mailto:[Е-ПОШТА ЗАШТИЋЕНА] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [Е-ПОШТА ЗАШТИЋЕНА] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
