US
Needs To Exit Iraq
By Mikhail Gorbachev
18 June, 2007
The
Toronto Star
Clashes
between U.S. troops and insurgents throughout Iraq, political maneuvering
in the United States over its presence there and the repercussions of
that presence around the world leave no doubt that the Bush administration’s
hopes for a turnaround have been frustrated.
The recent American troop
“surge” has only increased the grim statistics of military
casualties, civilian deaths and overall devastation. The U.S Congress
reluctantly approved funding for the continued troop presence without
requiring a date for withdrawal. But despite claims of victory, media
reports suggest that the Bush team understands its current Iraq policies
have run their course.
The administration is reportedly
considering a 50 per cent reduction of troops in Iraq next year, as
well as changing their mandate from combat missions to support and training.
There’s renewed interest in the recommendations of the Baker-Hamilton
Iraq Study Group, brushed aside only a few months ago. The administration
has begun consulting Iraq’s neighbours, Iran and Syria.
So even those who like to
persist in their mistakes and illusions are being forced to rethink
or, at least repackage, their policies. But is this a real change for
the better? Is there a light at the end of the tunnel?
No.
The key to understanding
the situation - as it appears today and as it appeared one, two or three
years ago, indeed as it appeared from Day One of the invasion - is simple.
Iraq is occupied by U.S. forces.
That fact hasn’t been
changed by Iraq’s creation of a parliament, the election of a
new government or the establishment of relative quiet in some parts
of the country. Millions of Iraqis perceive the occupation as a national
humiliation. That fuels sectarian conflicts, civil strife and continuing
instability.
President Bush blames the
terrorists (who, incidentally, had no foothold in Iraq before the invasion)
and urges Iraq’s neighbours and the international community to
co-operate in stabilizing the country. In fact, most of the United States’
international partners - not only members of the so-called “coalition
of the willing,” but also those who condemned the invasion - are
ready to co-operate.
A conference recently held
in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, agreed to write off $30 billion of Iraqi
debt. This decision was supported by China, Saudi Arabia, Spain and
a number of other countries. Russia agreed to forgive much of Iraq’s
debt even earlier. There is therefore no reason to accuse members of
the world community of failing to understand the importance of a stable
Iraq.
The Bush administration,
however, seems to be using this apparently constructive attitude for
self-serving ends. While asking its partners to help Iraq, it refuses
to do the one thing that would really aid that country: develop a strategy
for withdrawal.
Americans will put increasing
pressure on the administration to do exactly that. Keeping a certain
number of U.S. troops in Iraq for a reasonable period would be acceptable
to most Iraqis, as well as to the international community. But only
if it’s recognized that the occupation has ended. Such recognition
can be achieved only if normalization of Iraq becomes a true international
initiative, with the United States ceasing to only hand off certain
aspects when it is in its own self-interest.
U.S. withdrawal from Iraq
is inevitable. But is it not better to withdraw when the major players
inside and outside of Iraq agree on key issues?
Those don’t merely
include how to withdraw without too much pain, but also how to move
toward national reconciliation and how to ensure peace and security
in the region.
At first, to secure order
it could conceivably be necessary to replace U.S. troops with soldiers
from other countries whose presence would not be resented by most Iraqis.
Any such troops would have to be approved by the UN Security Council.
The international community’s help might also be needed to advance
the political process in Iraq, which is currently stalled to the point
of creating a real risk of the country breaking up. No one should fear
internationalizing the Iraqi problem; in the end, it would benefit all
parties.
In 1985, it took a change
of leadership in the Soviet Union to recognize the mistake of entangling
the USSR in the Afghan conflict. That new Soviet leadership - with me
as its president - set the goal of withdrawing from Afghanistan while
urging other countries to help in securing peace and stability.
Regrettably, the U.S. government
chose to forget its own assurances, as it had on other occasions. Instead
of co-operating with all responsible Afghan forces, including President
Mohammad Najibullah, the United States favoured the proxies of certain
elements in Pakistan.
We had warned our American
partners about the long-term dangers of playing this game, but they
seemed unaware of those consequences. Finally, when Russia backed out
of Afghan affairs, the road to extremism was left wide open. The “blowback”
from those fateful decisions came on a September morning in 2001, in
New York and in Washington.
Some would object that historical
analogies, whether with Vietnam or Afghanistan, only go so far. It is
true that every conflict has some unique features. But many of their
lessons are the same.
Think long and hard before
trying to solve any problem militarily. Talk of all other peaceful means
as exhausted is often baseless: An alternative is always available.
If, however, a great power makes the mistake of entangling itself in
an armed conflict, it shouldn’t make things worse by arrogantly
refusing to heed warnings of dire consequences.
Finally, and most importantly,
it should be understood from the start that ultimately there must be
a political solution to these conflicts. Seek it honestly, thinking
not just of your own self-interest, and look years, not just months,
ahead.
Mikhail Gorbachev
served as the leader of the former Soviet Union from 1985 until its
collapse in 1991. Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1990, he is currently
president of the International Foundation for Socio-Economic and Political
Studies (The Gorbachev Foundation).
© Copyright Toronto
Star 1996-2007
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights
Comment
Policy
Digg
it! And spread the word!
Here is a unique chance to help this article to be read by thousands
of people more. You just Digg it, and it will appear in the home page
of Digg.com and thousands more will read it. Digg is nothing but an
vote, the article with most votes will go to the top of the page. So,
as you read just give a digg and help thousands more to read this article.