Since 2003, Americans have been discussing and debating the merits of setting timetables for bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq. The major point of criticism against setting a future date or triggering events for withdrawing troops from the region is the contention that it sends the wrong message to the insurgency. As 2006 draws to a close, that point – with all of its former validity – is dead on the floor. Sending the wrong message to the Arab insurgency in Iraq is no longer a problem because the insurgency is no longer listening. The balance of control in the war has shifted dramatically in the last several months and the warring factions in Iraq are no longer waiting to see what America will do next. The important diplomatic and strategic moves being made in the Middle East are being made by Arab actors with and against other Arab actors. The U.S. is increasingly on the proverbial “outside looking in", despite being mired in battle. Here are the reasons why the U.S. will not play a significant role in resolving the current Middle East crisis.
Regional militias are no longer primarily focused on US forces – they are focused on one another. Edward Wong, writer for the New York Times reports that one criterion for defining a civil war is a conflict that features warring factions from the same country. He goes on to state that the sovereign government is almost always one of those factions. Such is the case in Iraq. The U.S.-supported Shiite government, led by Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki, is not an objective broker of the peace but is an aggressive, violence-inducing party spurred on by extreme sectarianism and an ambitious Shia cleric named Muqtada Al-Sadr. Their primary focus is the killing of Sunni civilians and the defeat of Sunni militia. Likewise, Sunni militia of late seem to be less concerned with killing U.S. troops and more concerned with attacking government buildings, Iraqi police forces and cleansing Sunni neighborhoods of Shiite civilians.
Other Arab nations will play a greater role. To make matters worse, this year saw Hezbollah win control of the Palestinian government and their fighting forces defy Israel in a brief but deadly rocket exchange on the Lebanon-Israeli border. As a result, Hezbollah has been legitimized in the Middle East not just as freedom fighters but as government leaders. Hezbollah wants a nation-state in the region and sees the current chaos as a way to get one. Lastly, each of the legitimate governments in the region has a stake in the outcome of the conflict. Israel may be the only Middle Eastern player in this region that has interests roughly coinciding with US interests. Every other nation, sect and political faction is advocating goals that run counter to both America’s stated and real intentions. As they seek to achieve their goals, they are engaging one another more and engaging the U.S. less. This means that a round table of sorts is forming in the Middle East and America is not invited.
America no longer has the will to pursue a misguided policy in Iraq . The entire world watched the American mid-term elections as intensely as we did. People on every continent, particularly in the Middle East understood that a comprehensive victory for Democrats meant a hastening to the end of America’s involvement in Iraq. Historically, Americans follow strong presidents into battle, sacrifice our young soldiers and squeeze our economy when the mandate is clear and the purpose is honorable. At this point in our history, Americans see a clear distinction between the clarity of our mission in Afghanistan and the horrific mess of a pre-emptive war in Iraq. The American people feel misled, our military was sent into battle without a plan for winning and President Bush no longer holds anything resembling a mandate from the American electorate. Despite John Kerry’s recent bout with “hoof-in-mouth disease", he was prophetic when he said, “How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?"
In 2007, Americans will make at least one important decision in the Middle East: How to bring US troops home. We may set timetables, establish a plan for phased withdrawal or possibly begin a massive draw down of forces in the near term. One scenario likely to play out behind closed doors is to privately ask Prime Minister Al-Maliki to publicly order US forces to leave. That is a “win-win-win" scenario in that it strengthens Al-Maliki in the eyes of Muslims worldwide, gives Bush political cover to reverse his “stay the course" policy and sets a predictable timetable for all of the warring factions and nation-states in the region who will ultimately decide Iraq’s fate. The chosen mechanism for ending America’s involvement is yet to be decided. However, the bottom line is that US troops will start coming home in 2007. The people of the Middle East will forge a solution to the conflict in Iraq by their own actions and their own determination.
» left by Jeff Pitts from Omaha, Ne (2 years 359 days ago.)
The situation in Iraq has taken an ugly turn indeed. We should not have disbanded the entire Iraqi Army and we should've taken out Al-Sadr in 2003. I drove by his house in Najaf by the way! But would-a, could-a and "I want my vote back" won't solve this issue. Neither will a timetable. A timetable won't strengthen Iraqi security forces, force the Shiites to compromise or get us out without calling the whole thing a victory for Islamic fascists. Respond to this comment
» left by Joseph Collins(353) Joseph Collins (2 years 359 days ago.)
Jeff, thanks for commenting! You have certainly seen aspects of this that most of us will never know about. However, what gives me hope is that I do not think America will make some multi-year, protracted commitment to Iraq. The Arab people (good and bad) will decide this regardless of how many American lives we throw at the problem. With that said, my preference is less US lives lost rather than more. Be blessed, Jeff. Talk with you soon! Respond to this comment
» left by Stephen Thibault(16) Stephen Thibault (2 years 359 days ago.)
The Middle East should be the New Germany, Slice it into 4 quarters give all the allied nations a section let each section fend for itself, but thats just one Prior Service Soldiers opinion. Respond to this comment
» left by Joseph Collins(353) Joseph Collins (2 years 358 days ago.)
Stephen, thanks for commenting! There are alot of people who feel the same way you do. However, as appealing as that might be, the West brings alot of pain on itself by implementing unwanted decisions in the Middle East. Iraq and the surrounding area was once divided by the Sykes-Picot Agreement (British-French) in 1916. Let's not do that again! The American Civil War was decided by Americans. Let's let the Arab people decide this one. They have a right to self-determination just like us! Respond to this comment
» left by Robert Melaccio, Sr.(5,148) Robert Melaccio, Sr. (2 years 358 days ago.)
You are correct. I do not see any reason why the fighting will cease. It hasn't in thousands of years and there is a bigger global agenda at play here. Separation of the waring factions is always step one- Kurds, $%&*$%&te and Sunni 3 states. This is always the first step before any peace can be implemented. It gives them all control over themselves. You know something it as simple a plan as one can get. The fact is it is ignored. The signs and symbols state very clearly- get out and get ready! Respond to this comment
» left by Joseph Collins(353) Joseph Collins (2 years 358 days ago.)
Robert, thanks for commenting! I am really hoping that the Iraq Study Group comes back with a solid, unified recommendation and the administration follows it. The sooner we make a good decision about Iraq, the sooner Congress can start solving problems in this country. Immigration & Global Warming are ticking time bombs. We need leadership in this country that not only "does no harm", but discerns the direction of the nation and implements effective, proactive policies. Have a good week! Respond to this comment
Disclaimer: All information on this site is provided for informational purposes only! By no means is any
information presented herein intended to substitute for the advice provided to you by any health care or other professional
or organization.
tweet this!
