By Donald Kaul
Via Minutemanmedia.org
You have questions about the war in Iraq? I have answers. These:
Q---Is the surge working or not?
A---Yes and no. When we flood an area with troops, things get a lot quieter. When we leave, those fun-loving Iraqis start: 1) Beheading each other and 2) Blowing each other up. There is no evidence that the surge has or will have a lasting effect.
Q---You don’t think the national government will ever be able to get control of the country, then?
A---Before you have a national government, you need a nation. Iraq ain’t.
Q---What about the documented successes in Anbar province, where tribal leaders have joined American forces in driving out elements of al Qaida?
A---That’s been a good thing, but don’t expect to repeat it elsewhere. Anbar is a largely Sunni area and tribal leaders made common cause with the United States because al Qaida was being positively beastly to them. That doesn’t mean they love us or will ever be able to get a square deal from the Shia-dominated central (ha-ha) government.
Q---Is the partitioning of Iraq into Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish sectors the answer then?
A---It’s an answer; whether it’s the right answer remains to be seen. A partitioned Iraq doesn’t address questions of equal access to oil revenues, areas like Baghdad that can’t be neatly partitioned or the specter of a civil war that could draw in Syria, Iran and Turkey, among others. (Even Saudi Arabia has promised to come to the aid of Iraqi Sunnis if they are mistreated, although the next war Saudi Arabia shows up for will be the first). If you want a religious war to engulf the Middle East, partition might be the way to go.
Q---If things are as bad as you say, why did General David Petraeus, our commander in Iraq, agree to withdraw the 30,000 surge troops by next summer?
A---He had no choice. Our army is close to being broken. It cannot sustain the surge any longer than next summer, no matter what the situation. In addition, the public clamor for withdrawal is growing daily and Gen. Petraeus had to make it seem as though President Bush’s Iraq strategy had a chance to succeed.
Q---Are you suggesting that Gen. Petraeus is a political general, one who crafts his military advice to fit the president’s wishes?
A---Heavens to Betsy, no. The man is a saint, a regular George Washington. He would never let politics influence his advice on the war. I would point out, however, that generals who give President Bush advice that contradicts his fantasy life---Shinseki, Abizaid, others---are soon colored gone.
Q---What about the Pottery Barn theory---“If you break it, you own it?” Don’t we have an obligation to the Iraqi people to bring some semblance of order and justice into their lives?
A---Yes, we do and in areas where we’ve gotten the cooperation of the population, we’ve done pretty well by them. But we haven’t been able to keep Iraqis from killing each other in much of the rest of the country. Nor do we know how to do it now. We have an obligation to the Iraqis but we also have one to the thousands of American troops we’re sacrificing to this futile exercise and to their families.
Q---What’s the best course of action, then?
A---The difficult truth is that there is no best course; all courses are bad. Certainly, an endless occupation doesn’t seem to be the answer. Abandoning the Iraqis to genocidal warfare is hardly more appealing. The name of the game being played in Washington right now is a contest between Republicans and Democrats to avoid blame when we leave and things go to hell. And they will, no matter when we leave.
Q---What ever happened to the Coalition of the Willing?
A---It went Missing in Action as soon as they started using real bullets.
