by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright Dec. 6, 2006
All Rights Reserved.

elaying the bipartisan Iraq Study Group report until after Nov. 7 was supposed to give President George W. Bush political cover. Yet voters saw through the hyped expectations, expressing unequivocal disgust for a failed policy, punishing Republicans and handing the Congress back to Democrats. Chaired by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III and Rep. Lee Hamilton, the report hasn't caught up with public opinion that believes Iraq is a lost cause. While rebuking the White House, the report offers 79 belated suggestions for rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Unlike honest voices like Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) or Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Penn.), the well-intentioned commission hasn't caught up with the reality that Iraq is unsalvageable. Urging a “diplomatic offensive” by engaging Iran and Syria sounds like the definition of pie-in-the-sky.

      Iran and Syria have fed the insurgency that has sabotaged the U.S. mission and brought anarchy and chaos to Iraq. Asking Syria's President Bashar al-Assad or Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for help makes Faust look naïve and childlike. Both enemies, together with Russian President Vladimir V. Putin, have succeeded in paying the U.S. back for enlisting Osama bin Laden to rid the Soviets of Afghanistan in early ‘80s. All three countries have armed, supplied and orchestrated the fierce opposition to Bush's plan to democratize the Middle East. No amount of U.S. forces, whether in a combat or training capacity, can reverse the insurgency engulfing Iraq. Urging more training of Iraqi forces won't alter the fundamental disloyalty of Iraq's new military, more loyal to insurgents and terrorists than the U.S. Neither the White House nor Baghdad has admitted this inescapable fact.

      Baker-Hamiliton repeatedly urges Iraq to take seriously the job of training Iraqi forces, gradually phasing down U.S. presence. That's precisely the same policy that former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld pushed with little success. Only recently did a published Pentagon memo reveal that Rumsfeld held the same doubts as the so-called liberal press that he, and the White House, routinely trashed. “The report is an acknowledgment that there will be no military solution in Iraq. It will require a political solution arriving through sustained Iraqi and region-wide diplomacy and engagement,” said Hagel, echoing the views of former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, skeptical that the Iraq Study Group offers any real fix. Talking about more training for the Iraqi military and looking to Iran and Syria indicates why the U.S. needs a coherent exit strategy.

      White House response to the Baker-Hamilton report showed appropriate deference but failed to admit the extent to which the White House and Pentagon whitewashed situation in Iraq to the American public. Calls for adding more troops by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and others don't get that, after nearly four futile years, the American people are fed up. Bush had plenty of time to deal with the insurgency but allowed Iraq's Prime Minister Noura al-Maliki and the new government to cut under-the-table deals with the Badr Brigades and anti-U.S. Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr's al-Mahdi army. When voters cast their ballots on Nov. 7, they demanded an end to perhaps the worst foreign policy blunder in U.S. history. What the Baker-Hamiliton group and White House don't get is that the country has moved on and wants elected officials to end U.S. involvement in Iraq.

      When weapons of mass destruction were not found in Iraq, the entire justification for the war vaporized. Since then, the White House has shifted excuses, now seeking a face-saving way out. Keeping U.S. forces in Iraq under the hypothetical threat of an al-Qaida takeover amplifies the same spin that failure will result in more terrorism on American streets. Iraq's insurgents and terrorists were never linked to the savages responsible for Sept. 11, despite the White House's best attempts to make the connection. “Despite the massive effort, stability in Iraq remains elusive and the situation is deteriorating,” read the Baker-Hamilton report. “The ability of the United States to shape the outcome is diminishing,” understating the obvious that time has already run out. Lecturing the Iraqis, threatening to pull out troops or, worst yet, adding more forces, won't change the outcome.

      If nothing else, the Iraq Study Group offered a contrasting view from the administration's overly rosy forecasts. Digesting the report, it's clear that the group hasn't yet caught up with new realities on the ground that no amount of pressure, money, troops or regional dialogue will stop the violence short of U.S. withdrawal. “This report gives a very tough assessment of the situation in Iraq,” said Bush, acting as if the findings were not obvious to almost everyone outside the Oval Office. While the Baker-Hamiliton report was well-intentioned, it offers no more concrete solutions than current White House and Pentagon policy. “We do not recommend stay-the-course solution,” said Baker, in a paradoxical understatement. Instead of rubber-stamping the report, the White House would be better off with a bold new strategy, offering a timely and realistic way out.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2005 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.