Tuesday, July 10, 2007

An Iraq Retreat Would Be Very, Very Bad

***UPDATE: links to all stories have been added.

The buzz right now is that Congress is putting some major pressure on President Bush to begin a retreat (aka 'pull-out' or 'drawdown' or 'redeployment') from Iraq. First, let's keep in mind the point of the surge. The whole idea was to beef up the U.S. presence to provide some breathing room for Iraqi diplomats to focus on getting the government rolling, not to remove literally all sectarian violence from the country. That would be impossible, and it's Iraq's issue to deal with, anyway. With that being said, there are a few monster-sized reasons a retreat is a bad idea.

Reason #1: We're almost there...! The surge is still in its early stages. Anyone who is truly informed about the situation on the ground knows it's a vastly different picture than what is portrayed by the Democrats and the MSM. The Washington Post reported as far back as March that there were signs of a change on the ground as reported by noted Iraqi and American commentators alike. The difference lies mainly in the fact that the U.S. is pushing terrorists out of hot areas and keeping them out, whereas previously we would clear out a hot area and move on. As stability is achieved in more areas, the terrorists are having to keep moving, which limits their effectiveness. Now is NOT the time for a retreat. The Wall Street Journal's Opinion page correctly points out that "Bush and al Qaeda's Ayman al Zawahiri agree that Iraq--not Afghanistan--is the central front in the war between them." As retired General Jack Keane told the New York Sun: "The tragedy of these efforts is we are on the cusp of potentially being successful in the next year in a way that we have failed in the three-plus preceding years, but because of this political pressure it looks like we intend to pull out the rug from underneath that potential success." Congress gave General Petraeus -- who, by the way, they approved unanimously as the commander to lead the surge -- until September 15th to show progress. So why are we talking retreat in July, two months early?

Reason #2: Iraq fears a U.S. withdrawal...a LOT! Both the citizens and members of the fledgling government -- all three sects -- know that disaster looms if the U.S. retreats. "This could produce a civil war, partition of the country and a regional war. We might see the country collapse," says Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari, a Kurd. Sadiq al-Rikabi, a senior adviser to Shi'ite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki agrees: "We in Iraq believe, not just the government, but all political parties, that the presence of these forces is necessary to prevent increasing violence and to stop the country sliding into civil war." Amira al-Baldawi, a Shiite member of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's ruling coalition is quoted by Brietbart.com as saying "Everybody wishes them to leave, even the US forces themselves, but this initiative would be catastrophic if carried out before Iraq manages to set up its security forces." Sunni Arab Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi told Reuters "I would be very happy to see the last American soldier leave today ... We understand their worry about not seeing much political progress in Iraq. But the problem is: who will fill the security vacuum if these forces withdraw?" Lt. Col. Kenneth Adgie, commander of the 1st Battalion, 30th Infantry Regiment of the 3rd Infantry Division put it very succinctly when describing how the common Iraqi people feel: "They truly are scared to death." If the U.S. retreats from Iraq, the entire Middle East -- terrorists and other nations alike -- will go for the jugular there. Case in point: yesterday, the BBC reported that 140,000 Turkish troops are massed on Iraq's borders. A U.S. retreat would likely lead to a massive outbreak of violence that could evolve into World War III.

Reason #3: Iraq IS the War on Terror. Bush has known it from the beginning. Al-Zawahiri (Osama bin Laden's number two man) knows it, and said so in a video released last week, describing it as "a centerpiece of its anti-American fight". The video showed that he's feeling the pressure, and having a hard time controlling his forces. Several local militias and other Sunni insurgents have actually begun helping the U.S. forces in fighting against Al-Zawahiri. What does this mean? The surge is working.

Reason #4: Bush can recover the Republican party. It's no secret that the Democrat leadership has been saying the surge isn't working (even before it got implemented) and that the war is over, so I won't bother citing any particular quotes. They've positioned their entire party's position on ending the war and bringing the troops home, regardless of the consequences. As Rush Limbaugh is fond of saying, the Democrats "own defeat." This is a golden opportunity for Bush and the Republican party, if they only had the courage to take advantage of it. As we heard so often about 9/11, let's connect the dots. If the Democrats need the U.S. to fail in Iraq, and if the U.S. military is actually making progress in Iraq, then it only makes sense that the Democrats can't afford for any more time to pass before they pass judgment on the surge and begin the retreat. So, they're pushing for an early withdrawal. If Bush and the Republicans had the guts to hold on just a little longer, we could see the real results from the surge: victory by our military. Victory for the U.S. military means victory for America, and that means -- sadly, due to their own errant political positioning -- defeat for the Democrat leadership.

Is the Iraqi government struggling to meet benchmarks? Yes, without a doubt. Are they making progress? Yes, equally without a doubt. Let's put things into a historical perspective. The Declaration of Independence was signed on July 4, 1776. The U.S. Constitution was not put into effect until March 4, 1789, twelve years later! The Bill of Rights came two years after that. These things are not simple, and they need time to be worked out. Our American Founders had that courage and took that time, and look where we are today. Shouldn't we give Iraq the same chance?

There's my two cents.

No comments: