Iraq passed a turning point last fall when the U.S. counterinsurgency campaign launched in early 2007 produced a dramatic drop in violence and quelled the incipient sectarian war between Sunnis and Shiites. Now, another tipping point may be near, one that sees the Iraqi government and army restoring order in almost all of the country, dispersing both rival militias and the Iranian-trained "special groups" that have used them as cover to wage war against Americans. It is -- of course -- too early to celebrate; though now in disarray, the Mahdi Army of Moqtada al-Sadr could still regroup, and Iran will almost certainly seek to stir up new violence before the U.S. and Iraqi elections this fall. Still, the rapidly improving conditions should allow U.S. commanders to make some welcome adjustments -- and it ought to mandate an already-overdue rethinking by the "this-war-is-lost" caucus in Washington, including Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).
Obama has not shown himself to be able to adjust from his knee-jerk ideologically motivated positions to this point, so I see no reason why that should change now. A large part of his "coalition" was made up by folks who hated Clinton's earlier pragmatic look at the use of force in Iraq. (Not to say it might not have been a deeply cynical look as well.) They are not interested in pragmatic calculations about what course we should chart in Iraq. There is only one "morally acceptable" position to hold for these zealots and there is every reason to believe Obama is simply one of them to his very core. (Not that he hasn't also shown he is willing to throw anyone, including his relatives, under the bus if it suits his purposes.)
If this campaign has shown anything it has shown the inability of the Obama campaign to accept when they are dead wrong, and, make no mistake, Obama was dead wrong about the surge. It plan for anything other than defeat in Iraq has been a non-starter from day one for Obama. There is no way he can embrace it now without looking foolish and weak.
If the positive trends continue, proponents of withdrawing most U.S. troops, such as Mr. Obama, might be able to responsibly carry out further pullouts next year. Still, the likely Democratic nominee needs a plan for Iraq based on sustaining an improving situation, rather than abandoning a failed enterprise. That will mean tying withdrawals to the evolution of the Iraqi army and government, rather than an arbitrary timetable; Iraq's 2009 elections will be crucial. It also should mean providing enough troops and air power to continue backing up Iraqi army operations such as those in Basra and Sadr City. When Mr. Obama floated his strategy for Iraq last year, the United States appeared doomed to defeat. Now he needs a plan for success.
In other words, as things are progressing continuing the Bush policies could be the best thing for the nation. Anyone think Obama is man enough to embrace that?
(Gleaned from QandO)
No comments:
Post a Comment