July 16, 2005
Iraq: Political retreat?
President Bush won't announce a timetable for pulling American troops from Iraq. That doesn't mean there isn't one.
Yet another leaked British memo says the administration is eager to make a "bold reduction" next year, despite concern by U.S. commanders. What could make the administration withdraw troops faster than military planners would like? Perhaps it's optimism that Iraq's political progress soon will result in election of a stable democratic government. Perhaps the administration believes its own claims that training of Iraqi security forces is going better than anyone else thinks. Or perhaps the prospects for elections in Iraq are not as central to the administration's thinking as the prospects that a years-longer Iraq entanglement could hurt Republicans in the November 2006 elections.
The Bush administration has provided ever-shifting justifications for the war itself, so it is reasonable to question President Bush's motivation for a withdrawal. He is right to be wary of a specific timetable. But by laying out specific goals, he could give Americans some idea when U.S. troops will be out and reassure the public that withdrawal isn't scheduled according to a domestic political timetable.
Those goals would include Iraqi political progress, development of the security force and measures of physical and economic reconstruction. That Iraqis must draft and adopt a constitution, followed by national elections, is a given. Gauging the capabilities of Iraqi recruits isn't so easy -- particularly if the administration is trying to fudge it -- though the number trained and equipped is the basic measure. The number of insurgent attacks also is telling. Horrific bombings like the one Wednesday that targeted Iraqi children receiving candy from U.S. troops should cost the insurgency local support. Fewer attacks would indicate that corner has been turned as well as improved police work.
Rebuilding also is crucial. The administration should set targets for providing reliable electricity, water and other necessities. The ability to pump and ship oil is key -- since revenue was supposed to pay for reconstruction -- as is collecting on the pledges by our allies for Iraqi development. If the Bush administration sets and meets reasonable goals, there will be no doubt that withdrawal results from improved conditions in Iraq. If not, the goal of withdrawal will be to avoid declining GOP conditions in Congress.
Posted by Opinion staff at July 16, 2005 8:00 PMOnce again, the Post goes full out speculating on a leaked British memo of unknown veracity and accuracy. They claim that President Bush must have some political plan that runs counter to the opinions of on scene commanders. The Post manages to fabricate an elaborate scenario from nothing. One doesn’t expect fiction on the editorial page.
Of course, there is also the snide remark “ever shifting justification�. It has been pointed out to the Post numerous times that there were multiple justifications for the Iraq war prior to the invasion. However, the press settled on WMD as the sole reason and refuses to budge from that contention. That, however, does not make the press correct. There is not a single justification that is new. Was not the Post among those who initially claimed there were too many justifications and the administration should settle on just one?
Next the Post lays out a series of improvements and goals. However, the Post and others in the press refuse to publish any progress toward those goals, so they can continue to say that there is no progress being made. But, published emails from military personnel and the occasional Wall Street Journal report show amazing progress far surpassing the pre- war conditions in Iraq. But, the Post follows a “see no good, speak no good, hear no good� policy and then hints at a total lack of progress. I guess, if it isn’t in the Post, it doesn’t exist.
The Post refuses to publish reports of infighting among the local terrorists and the Al Qaeda terrorists. The Post refuses to report on the increasing workload being taken over by Iraqi forces. The Post refuses to a rebuilt infrastructure. Then, the Post confuses military and police activities. Then confuses this lack of reporting with a lack of progress.
Unfortunately, this editorial is the product of someone either with an axe to grind or not paying enough attention. Or, more likely, both.
Rick
