Staying the Course v. 2.0

Staying the Course v. 2.0

November 27, 2006

The blue-ribbon Iraq Study Group (ISG) headed by James Baker and Lee Hamilton will meet today in Washington to discuss the first draft of its review of Iraq policy. According to The New York Times, the current draft does not include a proposal for the phased withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. It is the latest sign that U.S. policy in Iraq is unlikely to undergo a significant shift despite the midterm election results, which were viewed as a decisive national rebuke of the Iraq war. NBC News correspondent Norah O'Donnell noted yesterday that the Pentagon is “already developing an alternative” review of Iraq policy “to give the President an out if he doesn’t like the recommendations” of the ISG. And with the White House insisting that Iraq was not in a civil war, it appears that Vice President Dick Cheney wasn’t kidding when he said prior to the elections that the White House would go “full speed ahead” with its current Iraq policy regardless of the election results.

• The Iraq Study Group has to overcome internal conflicts over a timetable. As the Iraq Study Group meets today, media reports suggest there is likely to be “a potentially divisive debate about timetables for beginning an American withdrawal.” Though “several officials said announcing a major withdrawal was the only way to persuade the government of Iraq’s prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, to focus on creating an effective Iraqi military force,” some conservatives on the panel are resisting that recommendation. One panel member warned late last week, “It’s not at all clear that we can reach consensus on the military questions.” Division within the Iraq Study Group contrasts to a rare point of unity in Iraq: in recent interviews and sermons, Sunni and Shiite clerics have “articulated one message that appears to be gaining traction on both sides of Iraq’s civil war: The U.S. presence is making matters worse, and the Americans should go home.”
  
  
• As of Saturday, the war in Iraq has lasted longer than the U.S. involvement in World War II. At three years and over eight months, “only the Vietnam War (eight years, five months), the Revolutionary War (six years, nine months), and the Civil War (four years), have engaged America longer.” More troubling is that multiple factors suggest the Iraq conflict will continue indefinitely if U.S. troops remain. A classified U.S. government report made public this weekend concludes that the insurgency in Iraq “is now self-sustaining financially, raising tens of millions of dollars a year from oil smuggling, kidnapping, counterfeiting, connivance by corrupt Islamic charities, and other crimes that the Iraqi government and its American patrons have been largely unable to prevent.”
  
  
• The entire region is crisis. Yesterday, Jordan’s King Abdullah warned that the Middle East is on the verge of three simultaneous civil wars—in Iraq, Lebanon, and the Palestinian Territories—and that it is critical to “make sure we avert the Middle East from a tremendous crisis that I fear, and I see could possibly happen in 2007.” To address this confluence of crises, the Iraq Study Group is set to endorse “an aggressive regional diplomatic initiative that includes direct talks with Iran and Syria,” a strategy proposed by progressives over a year ago in American Progress’s Strategic Redeployment plan. It appears that the Bush administration is taking baby steps in this direction, but unless the U.S. sends a clear signal that our troops are leaving, regional diplomatic efforts will do little to change the dynamics in Iraq.