Bush’s
War Policy:
When Time Heals Nothing
By Ramzy Baroud
22 July, 2007
Countercurrents.org
The news of recent weeks emanating
from Washington and Baghdad point to one clear, if not final, conclusion:
The Bush administration's adventures in Iraq have been a complete failure.
What the media have eagerly
dubbed as the Republican Revolt is now reinforced by two of the most
distinguished Republican senators: John Warner of Virginia and Richard
Lugar of Indiana. Before the Democrats' takeover of the two positions
in Congress, Warner was the chairman of the Armed Services Committee
whereas Lugar presided over the Foreign Relations Committee. Their significance
in the party in national security and foreign policy issues is simply
uncontested.
Both senators proposed a
measure requiring troop redeployment from frontline combat as early
as January 1, 2008. The measure, unveiled on July 13, 2007, would require
the White House to come up with a plan for realignment by October 16,
2007.
One only needs to consider
the timing of that proposed realignment to appreciate the seriousness
of the proposal. The head of the US forces in Iraq, General David Petraeus,
along with US ambassador to Baghdad, Ryan Crocker, are expected to furnish
a report to the Congress assessing how the war has progressed and whether
the Iraqi government of prime minister Nouri Al-Maliki has lived up
to the conditions imposed by the Congress and signed by Bush. If Al-Maliki
and his circle, which many see as sectarian-based, fail to show competence,
there will be an aid cut.
Democrats, whether genuinely
or knowing that the Iraq fiasco is their winning card in their strife
with the embattled president, are fuming. In their view, even the momentous
initiative by Warner and Lugar seems, at best, insufficient. Democratic
Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, chastised the plan for not insisting
on any implementation. He insists, however, on an alternative legislation
that would require troop withdrawal by the spring of 2008. Many Democrats
are also following Reid's line; however, they don't represent the needed
majority to override a presidential veto.
Bush, on the other hand,
maintains that his strategy necessitates more time. He is no longer
demanding but "imploring." In fact, the latter word was the
precise term used in a Washington Post article on July 14, 2007, reporting
on the White House's response to the Republicans' rebellion. "Bush
implored Congress to wait for Petraeus's assessment before trying to
change strategy," Shailagh Murray wrote.
By expecting a redeployment
strategy to be drummed up by mid October 2007, the senators' proposal
would expect the White House to start preparing the document almost
immediately; by doing so, they render Petraeus and Crocker's recommendations
to be of no consequence in advance. And why wait if Petraeus's views
are already well known?
Petraeus spoke to the BBC's
John Simpson, in Baquba, Iraq, only a few days before the development
on Capital Hill. "Northern Ireland, I think, taught you that very
well. My counterparts in your [British] forces really understand this
kind of operation... It took a long time, decades," he said.
Petraeus is not pessimistic
to the point of eliminating the possibility of a military victory altogether,
but he is talking of a long and arduous war. "I don't know whether
this will be decades, but the average counter insurgency is somewhere
around a nine or a 10 year endeavor." Considering these views,
one can only predict that the Petraeus's report in September 2007, which
is likely to celebrate a few achievements here and there, will accentuate
the duration of the anticipated war. An additional 10 years to suppress
an "insurgency" is too long for a nation that is already growing
weary from war and its costs; to say nothing of the Iraqi people who
have paid the ultimate price.
The Bush administration's
failure to rally the Congress, and increasingly its own Republican Party
members there, is being paralleled by another political storm; this
time emanating from the Iraqi government itself: Al-Maliki is alleging
that the Iraqi government forces are capable of keeping security in
the country when US forces leave "anytime they want." A top
aide of his, Hassan Al-Suneid, has lashed out at the US for turning
his country into an "experiment in an American laboratory."
Al-Suneid made his comments
in protest of the Bush administration's benchmarks, but also of the
US military tactics, including coordination with Sunni militant groups
— "gangs of killers" according to Al-Suneid —
to ostracize and destroy Al-Qaeda in Iraq.
Meanwhile, Al-Maliki is dealing
with the unsolvable crisis and widening division within the ranks of
the Shiite political parties, and between the latter and the Sunni and
Kurds. His coalition crisis is a much grimmer version of Bush's Congressional
ordeal, although it is fueled mostly by Washington's policies and expectations.
While Pentagon reports continue
to talk of some success here and there in justification of the 30,000
troop surge, the situation on the ground tells of a different reality.
Suicide bombers, car bombs, endless US military raids, and shells whizzing
everywhere carry on unhindered. The fact that Iraqis are dying by the
hundreds makes all the Pentagon reports of measurable progress simply
ink on paper.
Back in the US, an Associated
Press-Ipsos poll, conducted 9-11 July, 2007, shows that the American
public approval of the Congress performance is as low as it was in June
2006 before Democrats took over both the House and the Senate. With
their approval of the Congress performance at 24 percent, Americans
are losing faith in both parties, after a temporary surge of hope that
the Democrat's ascension will help move the country into a new direction.
President Bush's approval rating remained at an equally devastating
33 percent.
It's too obvious that the
US policies in Iraq have failed beyond repair. That failure wouldn't
be of too much consequence if it were not for the fact that hundreds
of thousands of innocent Iraqis have paid the price. Many more will
likely die if the Congress doesn't act forcefully to carry out the wishes
of the American people and respect the sanctity of the lives of Iraqis
and their own.
Ramzy Baroud is a Palestinian-American author and editor
of PalestineChronicle.com. His work has been published in numerous newspapers
and journals worldwide, including the Washington Post, Japan Times,
Al Ahram Weekly and Lemonde Diplomatique. His latest book is The Second
Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People's Struggle (Pluto Press,
London). Read more about him on his website: ramzybaroud.net
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.