“Stay The Course” Is Dead
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Foreign Policy, WarIt’s all but official. James Baker’s “Iraq Study Group” is going to undermine Bush’s strategy…
While it weighs alternatives, the 10-member commission headed by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III has agreed on one principle.“It’s not going to be ’stay the course,’ ” one participant said. “The bottom line is, [current U.S. policy] isn’t working…. There’s got to be another way.”
If the panel recommends overhauling Bush’s approach to Iraq, it could give a boost not only to critics of current policy but also to officials in the administration who have argued for broad changes.
“There’ll probably be some things in our report that the administration might not like,” Baker said in a television interview last week.
..and frankly, I’m of the opinion these days that maybe a phased withdrawal isn’t the worst option anymore…
BAGHDAD, Oct. 15 — Militias allied with Iraq’s Shiite-led government roamed roads north of Baghdad, seeking out and attacking Sunni Arab targets Sunday, police and hospital officials said. The violence raised to at least 80 the number of people killed in retaliatory strikes between a Shiite city and a Sunni town separated only by the Tigris River.The wave of killings around the Shiite city of Balad was the bloodiest in a surge of violence that has claimed at least 110 lives in Iraq since Saturday. The victims included 12 people who were killed in coordinated suicide bombings in the strategic northern oil city of Kirkuk.
“This has pushed us to the point that we must stop this sectarian government,” Ali Hussein al-Jubouri, a Sunni farmer in Duluiyah, said as he searched for the body of a nephew reportedly killed in the violence around Balad.
Stop the government? That sounds like fighting words to me.
Shiite fighters responded in force, local police said. Witnesses said Shiite fighters began hunting down Sunnis, allegedly setting up checkpoints in the area to stop travelers and demand whether they were Shiite or Sunni.
If we don’t do something soon, Iraq will be lost to us. Either we pour more troops in there or we start a phased pullout and force Iraq to fend for itself. Since the former tactic looks increasingly less likely to happen because of political pressures at home, I’m guessing it’s going to be the latter. That’s a sad reality, and one I hate to accept, but I can’t help but think this is really the only way Iraq is going to ultimately fix itself.
Ugh…what a mess.
This entry was posted on Monday, October 16th, 2006 and is filed under Foreign Policy, War. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
October 16th, 2006 at 2:56 pm
The larger question is if this President can accept the more modest goals to be offered by Baker’s task force or if they will be met by resistance or even a campaign to discredit. It is increasingly difficult to determine where George Bush’s convictions end and his need to be right might begin. He has held fast to the argument that he isn’t concerned with polls or politics and yet his reported convictions continue to evolve to fit the changing circumstances. The essential question is how he actually views the concept of adaptation. The evidence suggests that he prefers to adapt his rhetoric to fit the circumstances rather than adapts his strategy to address the realities. As he receives this important report, I fear the former…but I’m hoping for the latter.
Read more here:
http://www.thoughttheater.com
October 16th, 2006 at 6:59 pm
Yes, Mr. Gardner, many things seem to be unraveling for this administration in this 11th hour (well, maybe 9th). What I wonder is why it’s taken so long?
The “I have political clout and I intend to use it” seems like a lifetime ago. When we first talked of invading Iraq I, like so many Americans filled with nationalistic pride, backed this president fully. But when notable insiders, such as Mr. Casey (sot sure of his name) the former head of the NSA who, so highly regarded, served thru the previous Clinton years into Bush’s first couple of yrs. and then resigned when he saw personally how biased Mr. Bush was towards the Iraq situation. But he was simply ignored as someone doing advanced sales on his new book, like so many others: retired generals with an ‘axe to grind’, and on and on. And, therefore I became increasingly suspicious of his motives,even during the first year of the Iraq war and knew we were in big trouble.
Is James Baker III releasing a new book soon ?
October 17th, 2006 at 4:35 am
“If we don’t do something soon, Iraq will be lost to us.”
That, of itself should be a far greater source of concern than the government of an anti-semitic Hitler-ite idjit in the house next door. It is already a reality.
Why?
” Either we pour more troops in there or we start a phased pullout and force Iraq to fend for itself. Since the former tactic looks increasingly less likely to happen because of political pressures at home, I’m guessing it’s going to be the latter. That’s a sad reality, and one I hate to accept, but I can’t help but think this is really the only way Iraq is going to ultimately fix itself.”
Certainly right analysis, but incorrect conclusion. For a starter, the present state of Iraq is such that it is inconceivable that “Iraq is going to ultimately fix itself”. Only if “ultimately” means next century, and that I will certainly not be waiting around to see.
__________________________________________________
What is far more certain -
1. Tripartite Iraq (by mid next year).
2. Direct Iranian assistance for the Shi’a portion (as soon as the split can be put in place).
3. Direct Saudi support and assistance for the Sunni portion (self defence measure to protect Saudi from Shi’a influence and Iraqi Sunni refugees).
4. Direct involvement of Kurds in increasing Kurdish insurgency in Turkey (they have only one goal, and Kirkuk gives them the resource they need).
Notice that none of that mentions the US. That is because there is an equal probability that the US will assist Israel in making (taking) punitive measures against Iran, Shi’a Iraq, and possibly Syria.
Note that no mention is made of oil. If Iran joins forces with Shi’a Iraq then there will be sufficient control of present OPEC output to offset any compensating output from the remaining major suppliers. If that does happen (and it is less likely the further out I go) it will make 1976(?) look like a couple of dry days in January rather than a six month drought. I suggest a re-read of this post.