Iraq Study Group: Surge Is Working

If you support our troop's efforts in Iraq, you're likely to have concerns clicking on an article on Iraq that names the Iraq Study Group (ISG) and the US Institute for Peace (USIP) as sources. Don't. This may strip the last bit of cover left for surrender-crats in Congress. Yes, it calls for a fifty percent troop reduction - in three years, which is a lifetime in US politics. But it also calls for mostly a hard line on Iran. Cafeterias may or may not be in vogue in Washington, DC - but there's enough room for Bush to pick his way through the menu to see the Surge through to a successful conclusion. The Dems did and do support the ISG and USIP, right? I mean, how can they not?

"The situation remains fluid, but a window has opened, fleetingly, for Iraq to proceed with political reconciliation. Iraq's national politicians have been unable to take full advantage of this opportunity," says the report, authored by USIP vice president Daniel Serwer.

The Baker-Hamilton report was most contentious because of its recommendations on diplomatic outreach to Iran and Syria. The new report says the United States should block Iranian attempts to control Iraqi politics and interdict its arms supplies to Iraqi militias, while also continuing to talk to Tehran directly and accommodating some Iranian interests in a neighboring state. "As long as the U.S. and Iran engage in a zero sum context for influence, Iraq will remain in turmoil and the U.S. will be bogged down," the report warns.

In contrast to a growing number of recent calls for various forms of breaking up Iraq along religious and ethnic lines, the report strongly stands against partition of one of the geo-strategic powerhouses in the Middle East, but leaves the question of decentralizing power to the Iraqis.

Comments

[Terry Gain]

Dan

I'm concerned about this information being posted on a Saturday when BIS, Chris, Gillian and Allwinger may have trouble increasing the potency of their meds.

[Dan Riehl]

Not to worry, Terry. The way the Left eats its own, they'll just attack the Institute for Peace - how freakin' mahvelous is THAT??? ha ha ha

[Joe Citizen]

Dan,

Could you reprint the part where they say the surge is working? I kinda missed that.

Or were you just referring to the "fleeting window" that is not being used - i.e. what everyone has known for the past few months.

Using that window for political reconcilliation is the whole point of the surge strategy, right?

And the repeated call for direct talks with Iran? Is that a "stripping of the last bit of cover" from the Bush strategy?

[BobInStamford]

This is great news! I suggest another carrier landing immediately. Those Iraqis will be shocked and awed at Bush dressing up as a fighter pilot yet again.

Once again, MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

[ajacksonian]

The 'zero sum context for influence' with Iran was started by Iran in 1979. We have been more than open to non-zero sum negotiations. Iran has not. That is the problem with the USIP: it does not address underlying factors of instability that is out of the control of the US and the West.

Just reading through their 'engagement of Islamists' in the Middle East, especially Morocco and Jordan, makes me wonder what these folks have been smoking. They paint such a lovely picture of Islamists parties and then ignore that places like Morocco and Jordan are terrorist havens. The Madrid 2004 attacks originated with a group based in Morocco, and its structure is such that it is not heierarchical but lateral in design. Getting the leaders does not take the head off the organization, but moves decisions and agreements to the lower levels which then rebuilds better coordination. Morocco has been unwilling to properly deal with that or utilize Mr. Baker's concept for how to settle a conflict with its neighbor over an area that Morocco annexed from it a couple of decades ago. That has an older organization there, willing to 'give peace a chance' now getting egg on its face as the Baker process is going nowhere and the calls to re-arm and fight again are heard.

Peace is not made in the absence of soldiers. It is made through creating a civil structure to enforce law and protect that structure with soldiers. Iraq's civil structure was a creature of Saddam and Ba'athist rule for decades, and ruled by internal terror. Getting an actual civil structure up that is accountable internally and externally will take some time. Morocco could use some of that, but doesn't want to let folks in the region they annexed get a *vote*... we have seen many of the 'one man, one vote, once' sort of deals in Africa and the Middle East, and getting something that is non-dictatorial and actually gives some liberty and freedom is a rarity, not the way things work there. Baker's group has a strange idea of 'peace' being the ability of money and goods to flow through a system, while building democracy is a bit harder because it offers the means to *control* that for the good of the people. Not that they will ever tell you that in a democracy things like *trade* are decided by popularly elected governments... no trade comes *first*! Worked so well in the Middle East for 90 years, hasn't it, this 'trade first and democracy whenever' deal?

And just what do you do when an authoritarian and militaristic party wins popular elections? That is a vote to *fight* not *talk*. And what if it promises to keep goods moving, but just wants to annex a province or two from a neighbor? Apparently perfectly ok with Baker and the USIP!

Just another bunch of unelected politicians trying to sway National policy. Who elected them for that? Right. No one. Remember it was Kissinger, Bryzynski, Baker, Scowcroft, Vance, Christopher, Albright and the rest of them that caused these problems in the first place, and still see that they did nothing wrong. They stripped the last bit of cover for themselves some time ago and now have no clothes. Why anyone looks to them for solutions or even insight is beyond me. Tells you a lot about Congresscritters liking them.

[LOL]

the report doesn't say what you claim it does Dan. Yet another case where reading comprehension escapes you. And you wonder why you're considered the dumbest of the wingnuts (which puts you high in the running for dumbest worldwide)

[Fred Beloit]

Huh? You must mean an understanding of the story escapes him, don't you LOL? Better sharpen up those idioms. Oh, and I'd skip trying to compose witty put-downs. You aren't good at it.

[Fred Beloit]

Huh? You must mean an understanding of the story escapes him, don't you LOL? Better sharpen up those idioms. Oh, and I'd skip trying to compose witty put-downs. You aren't good at it.

[Fred Beloit]

I repeated so as to ensure you understood.