This is a first for me, a light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel post about Iraq. Whether or not the light is an oncoming freight train depends on whether or not you view withdrawal of combat forces as an admission of defeat, as Senator John McCain does.
There are two significant, and perhaps converging, developments to report. First, Senator Barack Obama and his foreign policy team are talking with Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari about planning the withdrawal of nearly all U.S. combat units and ending the occupation. Denis McDonough, who advises Obama on foreign policy, said: “Barack has made clear that he favors a timetable . . . and wants to use that timetable to press Iraq’s political leaders to resolve their political differences.”
Second, Iraqi nationalism is making a comeback, according to Missing Links. There has been a learning curve, as Iraqi politicians slowly came to realize that sectarian strife was not only destroying the country but helping to justify continued foreign occupation.
It gradually became clear to everybody that the Bush administration wanted to stay in Iraq forever– in recent negotiations, they sought to perpetuate the occupation indefinitely with a treaty that granted 58 permanent bases, extraterritoriality (immunity from Iraqi law) for soldiers and civilian contractors, control of all the airspace, and the right to conduct combat operations all over the country without consulting the Iraqi government.
Badger believes that the U.S. divide-and-conquer strategy is now being effectively countered.
America continues to support Maliki in his sectarian attacks on rival groups, attempting to prolong and eventually “win” a sectarian battle where any group opposed to the Maliki-America alliance is eventually attacked with tanks and warplanes.
…The prevailing view in America seems to be that the Sadrists (along with other enemies of the American occupation) are on the ropes because of having backed off from sustained armed resistance. I think the mistake is that the Americans still see themselves as fighting a sectarian war… while the prevailing view in Iraq is that there isn’t a sectarian war, but rather a struggle against the whole idea of sectarianism (and its godfather the foreign occupation). And in a kind of cross-fertilization of political and armed-resistance thinking, the result is that anyone who behaves as if there is such a sectarian war is only showing himself to be a friend of the occupier.
Watch for the neocons to dance their victory dance over the seeming capitulation of the Sadrists in Amara. As in Basra, they cut a deal with Maliki that preserves their power. Though the operation is being hyped as a “crackdown” in the media, Maliki and U.S. commanders know that taking on the entire Sadrist movement in Maysan Province would be just about impossible with the forces available.
The political direction in Iraq is going toward a renewed focus on ending the occupation as soon as possible, hopefully without much more violence, and perhaps in cooperation with an Obama administration in Washington.
UPDATE: Four big oil companies (Exxon Mobil, British BP, Total of France and Royal Dutch Shell) have apparently given up on their dreams of production sharing agreements (PSAs) and settled for no-bid, short-term oil service contracts with Iraq. The PSAs would have made the western oil companies effectively the owners of Iraq’s oilfields, but of course you can’t make that stick if there’s no permanent occupation.
UPDATE: The Task Force for a Responsible Withdrawal from Iraq has issued a report outlining 25 initiatives the we can and should take to reduce violence and regional instability as the U.S. leaves Iraq. Quickly, Carefully, and Generously: The Necessary Steps for a Responsible Withdrawal from Iraq (PDF).
#1 by cav - June 18th, 2008 at 19:52
I suppose that asking to perpetuated the occupation until forever, was just an opening in the negotiating process. The hawks certainly knew that a ‘win’ was not going to happen so they sought to avoid a ‘loss’ by allowing negotiations and something somewhat nuanced to come into being. Yea, they’ll struggle and pitch and play all the hardball and market it at the right time of year, all the stuff they do so well. They’ll come in with something other than having thier butts kicked at a cost of several trillion and a bunch of killed and wounded. I guess we’ll have that to be thankful for.
The sad fact of the matter is that none of that had to have happened. It was by the will of the manipulative executive branch, thier corporate sponsors, and the media ownership that this crime came to pass. A massive heartbroken SHAME on the lot of them. may they rot in hell.
Ex General Taguba has called it what it is. See his stuff at Commondreams.org wed, june 18.
#2 by Leo Brown - June 18th, 2008 at 21:22
Nationalism and anti-colonialism were two of the most powerful forces in the 20th century and it would be a mistake to bet against those forces in the 21st.
Would someone remind me why we should want to remain in Iraq indefinitely.
#3 by Larry Bergan - June 18th, 2008 at 23:24
Here’s the exact article cav was talking about. Obviously, this retired general wasn’t one of the jerks pimping the war on every political show in America before the war, and getting paid to do that by the television station.
#4 by Larry Bergan - June 18th, 2008 at 23:38
If you happen to be up at 8 am tomorrow, Scott McClellan will be testifying before the judiciary committee concerning the traitors, (Bush’s dad’s words), who outed, covert agent, Valerie Plame’s identity. It will be interesting to see if this is just another diversion using a person deemed to be safe by the administration OR the beginning of the end of this corrupt, treasonous bunch of thugs running our government into the ground.
It will be broadcast on C-Span radio and hopefully on C-Span television.
Scott should have been a hypnotist. He can put anybody to sleep, no matter what he’s talking about, however it’s great just to have this important topic out there. It will be impossible for the “news” organizations to ignore it. Be sure to watch and form your own opinions before the pundits (learned persons) get ahold of it.
#5 by cav - June 19th, 2008 at 06:38
Leo, how would you suppose that the individual citizen might help evolve these nationalistic tendencies toward something more fitting to a conscious, empathetic entity? Imagination can easily project some sort of unravelling of cultures, toward more medieval structures, kings, hierarchy, etc, but mightn’t there also be a forward thinking possibility that could as easily come to pass. I’m not talking trips to Mars here, though spin-off technologies could come into play, more along the social axis. The vision needs to be given words and then substance. We suspect with good reason that the present administration does not have this vision.
#6 by Larry Bergan - June 19th, 2008 at 07:14
Sorry if you got up early to hear Scott McClellan, but it looks like it has been postponed until tomorrow.
#7 by Leo Brown - June 19th, 2008 at 18:10
Cav,
I am not sure how the Iraqis can get their act together. In principle they can do it. There is a line in Three Cups of Tea where Mortenson’s host (somewhere in Pakistan or Afghanistan) tells him that “we may not be educated, but we are not stupid.” I am also not sure what is the best way to help them. A permanent occupation will fail. A too rapid withdrawal might lead to short term chaos. The bazaar was invented in this part of the world. They know how to negotiate. Islamic Civilization has its positive aspects. I suspect they must ultimately fall back on the best of their past traditions and try to rebuild from there. Iraq may be more tribal than national. Occupying them may force them to be nationalists. They could become pan-Islamic, but that may be what Dick Cheney worries most about.
#8 by cav - June 19th, 2008 at 21:30
Leo, thanks for your thoughtful reply. I suppose what I had hoped for in it might have been less specific to Iraq, and more your take on the bigger picture. I realize that structures have been evolving that encompass the entire globe, that not all of these structural attempts are completely positive, but, given that a future will likely exist, I wonder how to take the edge off the colonizer fear and subsequent desire for conquest, and to begin to enable nations with a better spirit of world citizenship.
I’ll grant that it is an exercise in idealizm, perhaps even fantasy, but if the neo-cons can do it, so can we, and the sense I have right now is that as the neo’s come under fire, it would behoove us ‘others’ to have some framework in which to involve our energies. IOW, it’s not all the successful Politicians’ purview.
At one time I was sort of rooting for a pan-arabic unification. I saw it as no less worthwhile to the people of that part of the world than the north American union, perhaps even more just and less greedy. A similar undertaking seems to be occuring in South America today. Over the years, divide, subvert, belittle, and acquire has made that vision unlikely. Entirely human tactics, but not the only ones available, I believe. If our power and sense of ‘rightness’ deminish, something of what I’m hoping for may have some room to grow.
In the grand scheme some unity can be attainable among all the planets different groups, but something contrary to nationalism will have to be devised. Sketchy, I know.
Again thanks for your thoughtful input.
#9 by Richard Warnick - June 20th, 2008 at 08:27
I believe the concerns about a “too rapid withdrawal” of U.S. troops from Iraq are misplaced. From a politician’s point of view (e.g. Barack Obama) I can see that it’s important to seem responsible and sophisticated, therefore few will say “out now.” However, the assumption that the U.S. is a force for maintaining order in Iraq is wrong, and based on American exceptionalism.
Our forces create chaos and destruction, which is why they are not welcome in Iraq. The reason for this is simple– we don’t have anywhere near the number of soldiers needed to effectively occupy Iraq outside of our network of bases. At the height of the so-called “surge,” there were only 38,000 U.S. infantrymen on the streets. This is an effective force equivalent to the New York City Police Department, to secure a country of 27 million people roughly the size of California. Basically, our units go around conducting raids and calling in artillery and air strikes, while insurgents and militias easily avoid them or set ambushes as they choose.
#10 by Leo Brown - June 21st, 2008 at 20:49
Richard,
You are correct that we don’t have enough troops to control the situation and no serious chance that we could put that many into Iraq at this point. We are just another militia. We have the biggest guns, but everyone knows we have to go sometime. There is a good chance that if and when we announce a departure timetable that the Iraqis will get down to serious negotiations on how to get along with each other.
We do have the option to push Iraq one direction or another before leaving. We could support the informal or formal partitioning of Iraq. We could support Muqtada al-Sadr. Even if we decide to just march out, it will take some months to do so in an orderly manner. There is some chance that things could go badly during a withdrawal. Things would go better if we had a regional understanding with Iraq’s neighbors, but that would require talking to Iran. Bush can’t do this. McCain seems to be following Bush on this. Obama has a chance of pulling this off. If he does successfully exit Iraq, he will be a hero. If he gets stuck in Iraq for four years, it will doom his presidency. If we leave and things go badly thereafter, there will be the myth that things would have been fine if we had just stayed six more months. The only certainty is that staying indefinitely is playing a losing hand.
#11 by Leo Brown - June 22nd, 2008 at 07:01
On reflection, playing a losing hand is not strong enough to characterize what we are doing. Today’s Juan Cole column points out how the disaster we have visited on Iraq is proportionately equivalent to firebombing to death everyone in Chicago and the entire state of California being crippled or in bandages. May God have mercy on them (Allah yarhamhum) and may God find a way to forgive us.