Last week’s briefings for the press by U.S. civilian and military officials in Baghdad were uniformly upbeat, cautious, and predictable.
Iraq: Finding the Diamonds?
read more
Iraq
Counting Troops in Iraq
This past week, both the House and the Senate debated and voted on legislation affecting the deployment of U.S. troops in Iraq. In the Senate, the issue was the length of time soldiers and Marines would have at home between deployments to the war zones of Iraq and Afghanistan. In the House, Ike Skelton (D-MO) introduced a bill requiring the secretary of defense to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq within 120 days of the legislation becoming law and complete the drawdown to a “limited presence” – a heretofore unknown parameter – by April 1, 2008.
Putting the President in His Place
July 4th 2007 may turn out to be an Independence Day second only to the original one of 1776 in its importance to the nation’s history. If the first week back from its holiday recess is any indicator, Congress may now be firmly on the path of reclaiming its constitutional responsibilities – and thus asserting its independence from the imperial pretensions of the current “King George” – to shape policy and programs on defense and foreign affairs.
Turkey vs. Iraq?
While Capitol Hill battles the White House over Iraq, another battle is brewing in the Middle East. In the last week the Turkish military has moved 140,000 troops from across its country to the southern border with Iraq. These troops represent an invasion force meant to prevent the continued terrorist activities of the Kurdish minority that use northern Iraq as a safe haven. Turkey has previously voiced its intent to attack elements of the Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK) after repeated bombings and recent attacks on civilians in the south of Turkey. If Ankara chooses to use military force in the north of Iraq now, the results would be dire for the future security and stability of Iraq.
The effects of Turkey conducting military operations in northern Iraq would undermine the fragile security environment that currently exists in two major ways. First, the Kurdish soldiers that are operating in Baghdad as part of the U. S. military “surge” would be tempted to abandon their posts in order to protect their homeland in the north. Second, because Turkish troops would not likely remain for long in the north of Iraq, the remaining PKK fighters could regroup and continue to use northern Iraq as a base of operations for its recent offensive attacks in Turkey. Iraq would have difficulty meeting either of these challenges. To face both simultaneously would only exasperate and quicken the destabilization of Iraq and the region.
Iraq Equals Israel?
President Bush’s Naval War College graduation speech on June 28 demonstrated, yet again, the true disarray of America’s public diplomacy effort. In comparing Iraq with Israel, the president managed to do even more damage to reform efforts in the Middle East.
Earth to Bush: Iraq isnt South Korea
The Bush Administration recently pointed to the over-five-decades-long US military presence in South Korea as a successful model for Iraq. The implications of this comparison seemed to escape them. General Raymond T. Odierno, who oversees daily military operations in Iraq, called it “a great idea,” as if agreeing with the suggestion by a colleague to order take-out sushi for lunch.
Ban Ki Whom?
People used to equate the vice-presidency of the United States with a "pitcher of warm spit." Since Dick Cheney occupied the position, the spittle has become more potently venomous and the office consequently more important and noticeable. Similarly, the secretary-generalship of the United Nations is a very malleable office. The contrast with a predecessor’s personality can make the successor’s style more or less noticeable. Ban Ki Moon’s tenure so far has been on the low decibel end of the scale, even compared with Kofi Annan, who always spoke softly, realizing that there was no big stick at hand.
Victory in Iraq?
While the American people are seeking a way to bring the troops home from Iraq, the President and his administration are aiming to stay for much longer by redefining “victory” in Iraq once again—this time as a permanent occupier. Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters on June first this year that he favors a mutual agreement with Iraq in which “some force of Americans…is present for a protracted period of time….” Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, in charge of daily military operations in Iraq, supported this idea, comparing our involvement in Iraq to our continued military presence in South Korea. This type of “victory” was not what America signed up for as Bush led the nation to war. But even worse, this victory isn’t even realistic.
The End of Supreme Command
George W. Bush has degraded many important American concepts and values, such as the rule of law, human rights, and just government. Civilian control of the military is his next victim. America’s founding fathers were justifiably concerned about the possibility of military dictatorship, which is why they made the president commander-in-chief of the armed forces.
Northern Iraqs Tangled Web
There are few areas in the world more entangled in historical deceit and betrayal than northern Iraq, where the British, the Ottomans, and the Americans have played a deadly game of political chess at the expense of the local Kurds. And now, because of a volatile brew of internal Iraqi and Turkish politics, coupled with the Bush administration’s clandestine war to destabilize and overthrow the Iranian government, the region threatens to explode into a full-scale regional war.