Iraq War: Turning and tipping

"I think we are winning.  Okay?  I think we're definitely winning.  I think we've been winning for some time." - Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on the Iraq War 04/26/05

"I just wonder if they will ever tell us the truth." - Harold Casey, Louisville, KY, October 2004.

I'm very hesitant about news of "turning points" and "tipping points" of any kind coming out of the Iraq War.  So I'm trying to take recent indications that we're seeing a "tipping point" for the worse coming out of Iraq with a grain of salt.

But there's caution, and there's foolish optimism.  And the news from there recently doesn't give those in the reality-based community a great deal of comfort about the state of things there.  Here are some recent examinations:

The Iraqi constitution: DOA? Angry and marginalized, Sunnis are threatening to torpedo Iraq's constitution. Disaster looms, and the Bush administration's blunders are largely to blame. by Juan Cole Salon 08/26/05.

The problem, however, is that the Kurds and Shiites could compromise in part because they both saw the benefits of regional confederations with claims on local resources, given that both have petroleum. The Sunni Arabs fear that such a system will leave them only with "the drifting sands of Anbar province." A system like Alaska's, in which oil profits are shared as royalties with all citizens equally, might have sidestepped some of the disputes over the prerogatives of provincial confederations, but the American Coalition Provisional Authority that ruled Iraq for a year did not institute that system when it had the chance. The Americans were still dreaming then of privatizing everything in Iraq for the sake of U.S. corporate profits (including the air Iraqis breathed, if possible.) Moreover, the long string of Bush administration mistakes in Iraq, along with the rejectionism of many in the Sunni leadership strata, had so alienated most Sunni Arabs that their negotiators - unlike the populist Kurdish and Shiite leaders - lacked much of a base of popular support, fatally weakening the Sunni bargaining position.

Parliament can clearly ram the draft constitution through at will, since the Shiites and the Kurds dominate it. In fact, the Kurdistan regional Parliament approved the federal constitution on Aug. 24, even before the federal Parliament had. But the real question now is whether the constitution can survive the referendum. The Sunni Arabs dominate Anbar and Salah al-Din provinces, and almost certainly can muster a two-thirds "no" vote on Oct. 15 in both. They may also be able to pull off a rejection in Ninevah province. In that case, Parliament would dissolve, new elections for Parliament would be held in December, and the entire process would begin all over again - a nightmarish prospect. Meanwhile, the Sunni Arab guerrillas continue their macabre war against a new order that cannot seem to get its act together.

Iraqi forces may need years of preparation by Tom Lasseter, Knight-Ridder Newspapers 08/26/05.

Three weeks of patrols and interviews in restive Anbar province suggested that Iraqi security forces will need years of preparation before they're ready to take charge of the complex and violent tribal areas of western Iraq. President Bush has said repeatedly that U.S. troops will withdraw only when Iraqi troops are ready to take over.

Many of the Iraqi troops were in poor condition, unable or unwilling to complete long foot patrols without frequent breaks. They often didn't know what to do in complicated situations, standing back and letting American Marines and soldiers take the lead.

Most of the Iraqi troops interviewed were Shiite Muslims - the majority religious group in Iraq - who were long oppressed by Sunni Muslims, Anbar's predominant ethnic group but a minority across Iraq. That history creates obstacles to establishing trust with the locals.

In Fallujah, after a U.S. assault last November routed the insurgency that had demolished thetown's police force, the Interior Ministry sent in troops from its Public Order Brigade. Residents accuse the battalion of being a de facto Shiite militia.

The version that reporters like Lassater are giving us and the happy-talk versions put out by Dear Leader Bush and his administration simply can't both be true:

The Iraqi National Guard, heralded last year as the answer to security in the area, has been disbanded because morale was low and insurgents had infiltrated it. The old national guard trucks, with their blue emblems, now sit rusting. As with the Iraqi Civil Defense Corps, the predecessor to the national guard, American officials say the new Iraqi army and police will establish security in places such as Anbar.

However, the police force has collapsed in Ramadi, the provincial capital. Two divisions of Iraqi soldiers - a total of 12,000 men - are to establish security, but so far only 2,000 are available, and half of them lack basic training.

Hit, a city of 130,000, has no police force. North of Hit, in Haditha - near the site of attacks that killed 20 Marines this month - the police chief handed over all the patrol cars to the Marines in January. (my emphasis)

It's seeing reports like this that make me so skeptical of even longtime war critics who are still engaging in vague happy talk about ways that the situation can be saved:

A Marine standing nearby suggested to Stickland that maybe the answer was to train Iraqis as traffic police, give them orange vests and have them do traffic stops on their own.

Strickland laughed. "Yeah, until the muj finds out the Americans gave them the vests; then they'll kill `em," he said, referring to the insurgents by the Arabic word for "holy warrior," mujahedeen. "When they have problems, these guys will just leave their uniforms and walk off."

I'm sorry to say that Wesley Clark, who I certainly think of highly in his opinions on military and political matters, is still indulging that now increasingly absurd ritual: Before It's Too Late in Iraq 08/26/05, WesPAC Securing America Website.

Meanwhile, on the military track, security on the ground is poor, not only in terms of suicide bombing but more importantly, in terms of protection of life and property for ordinary Iraqis. The US armed forces still haven't received the resources, restructuring and guidance adequate for the magnitude of the task. Why, in June, 2005, over two year into the mission of training Iraqi forces, was the President announcing such "new steps" as partnering with Iraqi units, establishing "transition teams" to work with Iraqi units, or training Iraqi Ministries to conduct anti-terrorist operations? There's nothing new about any of this – just standard nation-building doctrine which we used in Vietnam. Where are the thousands of trained linguists that we need? Where are the flexible, well-resourced, military-led infrastructure development programs to win "hearts and minds?" Where are the smart operations and adequate numbers of forces – US, coalition, or Iraqi –to strengthen control over the borders?

Given considerations like those described by Lassater's news report, it's already too late to approach the problem in this light.  Any solution now is a matter of minimizing the damage to America, Iraq and the Middle East from the disaster Dear Leader and his warlords have created in Iraq.  Anything along these lines that the United States can still accomplish will have to be done as part of a negotiated exit strategy that removes US troops from Iraq sooner rather than later.

But do I even need to say that even an over-optimistic Wes Clark still makes far more sense than Dear Leader and his supporters? War didn't and doesn't bring democracy  by Wesley Clark Washington Monthly May 2005.

Operating on the theory that if you say something enough times people will believe it, the Bush administration and its allies have in the last few years confidently put forth an array of assertions, predictions, and rationalizations about Iraq that have turned out to be nonsense. They've told us that Saddam's regime was on the verge of building nuclear weapons; that it had operational links with al Qaeda; that our allies would support our invasion if we stuck with our insistence about going it alone; that we could safely invade with a relatively small number of groundtroops; that the Iraqi people would greet us as liberators; that Ahmed Chalabi could be trusted; that Iraq's oil revenues would pay for the country's reconstruction; and that most of our troops would be out of Iraq within six months of the initial invasion. ...

Today, American democratic values are admired in the Middle East, but our policies have generated popular resentment. Although it may come as a surprise to those of us here, there is a passionate resistance to the U.S. “imposing” its style of democracy to suit American purposes. Democratic reformers in the Middle East don't want to have their own hopes and dreams subordinated to the political agenda of the United States. It's for this reason that the administration shouldn't try to take too much credit for the coming changes. Or be too boastful about our own institutions. Or too loud in proclaiming that we're thrilled about Middle Eastern democracy—mostly because it makes us feel safer. A little humility is likely to prove far more useful than chest-thumping. ...

Democracy can't be imposed—it has to be homegrown. In the Middle East, democracy has begun to capture the imagination of the people. For Washington to take credit is not only to disparage courageous leaders throughout the region, but also to undercut their influence at the time it most needs to be augmented. Let's give credit where credit is due—and leave the political spin at the water's edge.

Iran covers all its bets in neighboring Iraq by Warren P. Strobel, Knight-Ridder 08/25/05.

When rival Shiite Muslim factions battled in Iraqi cities this week in a worrisome new turn for the country's stability, neighboring Iran had little to lose: It supports both factions.

Iran has shrewdly pursued a strategy of "portfolio diversification" in Iraq. It backs a wide range of actors - even competing ones -with support, money and weapons to ensure that it has a say in Iraq's future, Western officials and analysts said.

"They are like lobbyists. They're spreading the money around, so whoeverwins owes them," said Juan Cole, a University of Michigan professor and expert on Shiite Islam who's criticized U.S. policy in Iraq. ...

"I think the Iranians feel that they are basically winning in Iraq. They feel things are basically going their way," said Kenneth Katzman, a Middle East specialist at the Congressional Research Service, part of the Library of Congress.

Iran has maintained ties to secular Shiite leaders such as Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Chalabi, the former head of the exile group Iraqi National Congress, and to religious groups such as the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq.

It's also reached out gingerly to firebrand nationalist cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, according to the analysts and a senior U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the issue of Iran's involvement in Iraq is being debated within the American government and involves classified data. (my emphasis)

Chalabi, of course, was the Pentagon's favorite to be America's puppet ruler in Iraq.  Great choice, guys.

And speaking of Turning points? by Jules Witcover Baltimore Sun 08/10/05.

Ms. Sheehan, co-founder of a group called Gold Star Families for Peace, is part of a growing community of Americans directly affected by Mr. Bush's decision to invade Iraq.

This community, slow to mobilize, is showing signs of surfacing in greater numbers and louder voice. A Freedom of Information Act filing triggered a belated agreement that returning caskets of soldiers killed in Iraq can be photographed. And a major march on Washington is being organized for Sept. 24 by United for Peace and Justice, a coalition of anti-war groups.

At the same time, Mr. Bush's approval ratings continue to head south. The latest Newsweek poll by Princeton Survey Research Associates International gives him only 42 percent, lowest of his presidency, as opposed to 51 percent disapproval. Worse, 61 percent of the 1,004 adults polled said they disapproved of his handling of the war, to only34 percent who approved.

Following Mr. Bush's repeated statement that U.S. forces will stay until Iraqis trained to deal with the insurgency can do so, only 25 percent said they agreed, with 38 percent saying they were willing to wait less than a year. Twelve percent said they wanted U.S. forces out now. ...

But a stirring is building that in coming months is likely to test Mr. Bush's resolve in Iraq, and the home front's patience, more than ever before.

That 61% of Americans who disapprove of various aspects of the war are the targets of the threats of vigilante violence made by the geriatric hate group the American Legion with the tacit - hell, all but explicit - approval of the lying Gen. Myers that I quote at the beginning of my Iraq War posts.

"Wars are easy to get into, but hard as hell to get out of." - George McGovern and Jim McGovern 06/06/05