Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Thursday, November 16, 2006

Abizaid Opposes Withdrawal, Increase in Troop Levels;
Nearly 100 Killed, including 6 GIs
Hayden: Almost Satannic Terror


Reuters was able to find out about and report nearly 100 killings in the ongoing Iraqi civil war on Wednesday. Police discovered 55 bodies in Baghdad alone, and there were car bombings, firefights and assassinations. The deaths of 6 US troops were announced.

Here's how I interpret the contretemps Wednesday between Gen. John Abizaid and Republican Senator John McCain.. McCain wants to send another division, about 20,000 US troops, to Iraq.

Abizaid told him:

1) that would produce only a temporary improvement since the US doesn't have a spare division to send to Iraq for the long term and

2) Increased US troop levels are counterproductive because they remove the incentive for the Iraqi government and army to get their acts together and fight the guerrillas and militias effectively and

3) If Iraq is going to come back to better days, it will have to be primarily with Iraqi troops and

4) Iraqi troops are not now doing the job, so if more US troops are sent to Iraq it should be as trainers and units available for joint patrols, not as independent combat troops.

I'd just like to point out that most of Abizaid's arguments could also be deployed for a phased withdrawal, which he opposed. My senator, Carl Levin supports the phased withdrawal idea, and so do I. What if it isn't just an increased US presence that would remove the incentive for Iraqi leaders to compromise and/or fight effectively? What if *present* troop levels do that? I say, let's take out a division ASAP (20,000 men) and make it clear that we're never putting a division back in to replace it. Then let the Iraqis try to fill the resulting vacuum themselves. Give them armored vehicles, tanks, helicopter gunships, and a nice wood-panelled room where they can negotiate with one another.

And then after a couple of months I would pull out another US division.

Such a phased withdrawal is not guaranteed to succeed. It has a better chance of succeeding than the current policy.

Matthew Stannard at the SF Chronicle on the Ministry of Higher Education kidnappings.

Nir Rosen's anatomy of a civil war.

Here's what Director of Central Intelligence Michael Hayden really thinks of the Iraq situation:


' MICHAEL HAYDEN: In Iraq today there is criminality and lawlessness on a broad scale. In Iraq today there are rival militias competing for power.

Any Iraqi leader, no matter how skilful, is going to be hard-pressed to reconcile the divergent perspectives that I've mentioned. Divergent perspectives that Shi'a and Sunnis and Kurds bring to the table and also unfortunately very often bring to the streets.

And to deal with that, against a backdrop of an intentional al-Qaeda campaign of almost satanic terror.'


Here's what Bush makes him say:

' MICHAEL ROWLAND: The CIA chief believes progress is being made in Iraq, but the gains are very slow. '


You can't see it because this is not video, but I am doing one of those Jon Stewart double takes at the juxtaposition of these two assertions.

Louise Roug of the LA Times reports that Iraq's health system is very ill.

The 'I hate to say I told you so' Department: French Foreign Minister Dominique Villepin let Washington have it on Wednesday, complaining that the US-induced civil war has made Western policy success in the Middle East far more difficult. I guess we'll have to go back to calling them French Fries, even if the French never knew what we were talking about in the first place in that regard. They just call them 'fried potatoes' and I think they think they are American in origin.

12 Comments:

At 8:21 AM, Blogger Unknown said...

I agree with you 100% regarding the phased withdrawal. However, I would like to know there is a complete plan that is thought out and then the public should be prepared. the congress mobilized to create cross-party concensus. Let all the politicos have the chance to state their position.

 
At 8:35 AM, Blogger Don Thieme said...

Potatoes are American in origin.

 
At 9:13 AM, Blogger Evan Haefeli said...

A note on the war on French fries:

The origin of French fries, like French toast and French dressing, is not France. It is French Canada. Try eating the local food next time you're in Quebec and this will be clear. They were probably imported to American cuisine via the great (yet overlooked) French Canadian migration to New England & upstate New York in the 19th century.

Neither French Canadians, nor the French themselves, refer to any of these items as "French" - just as Italians don't refer to Italian dressing as anything other than normal salad dressing.

So, taking the "French" out of French fries could never bother the French - or the French Canadians. It's actually an assault on an age-old American tradition of associating our foods with the immigrants who brought them to us.

In other words, "freedom fries" are anti-American.

 
At 10:14 AM, Blogger Jeff Crook said...

Don't forget "cheese-eating surrender monkeys."

How much longer do you think the Chinese will continue to finance our imperialist adventures? I mean, if they let us do it until we've ruined ourselves, we won't be able to buy their cheap imports. Sooner or later Wal Mart will have to step in and say enough is enough.

Or maybe that's what happened on November 7?

 
At 12:21 PM, Blogger MonsieurGonzo said...

The Guardian : “President George Bush has told senior advisers that the US and its allies must make "a last big push" to win the war in Iraq and that instead of beginning a troop withdrawal next year, he may increase US forces by up to 20,000 soldiers, according to sources...

Four-point strategy :

· Increase US troop levels by up to 20,000 to secure Baghdad and allow redeployments elsewhere in Iraq

· Focus on regional cooperation with international conference and/or direct diplomatic involvement of countries such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia

· Revive reconciliation process between Sunni, Shia and others

· Increased resources from Congress to fund training and equipment of Iraqi security forces

...still no call for the American People to do anything: eg., a national energy imperative to sharply reduce energy consumption in general, petroleum products in particular ~ perhaps with a J.F.Kennedy type of "within ten years, this nation will land a man on the moon..." vision for virtual energy independence coincident with large-scale University, institutional R&D to result in (similar to the Space Programme) stunning advances in Energy technologies, including HVAC, preservation/refrigeration, packaging/recycling, and of course transportation methodologies; and, less anyone failed to take note ~ none of the above "Last Plan for IRAQ" has anything to do with the real threat to America itself; ie., terrorism, and your neglected border, vital infra-structure security, and lack of competent response to natural / man-made events of Mass Destruction.

 
At 1:50 PM, Blogger Juan Cole said...

For Bob Gaines:

Of course tanks and armor would help the Iraqi army. If there had been a couple of tanks stationed outside the Ministry of Higher Education ready to blow away the Mahdi Army vehicles as they approached, Tuesday's kidnapping would not have been possible.

Tanks and armored vehicles cannot destroy the insurgency-- that is the point of the wood panelled rooms for negotiations. But if properly deployed they can be a force multiplier for the Iraqi military in providing more security than now exists.

The US armor and tanks aren't useful for this purpose because they aren't being deployed for Iraqi but for American purposes. E.g. the Pentagon has consistently refused to guard Iraqi ministries for over three years except if they happened to be in the Green Zone.

 
At 2:07 PM, Blogger Nur-al-Cubicle said...

Trivia department: We have to thank the Belgians for waffles and French fries.

 
At 7:27 PM, Blogger markfromireland said...

Now let's get this straight. Karrada is controlled by SCIRI. The interior ministry is controlled by SCIRi. The police force brigadier for Karrada is wait for it ... a member of SCIRI. The cars were police cars according to eyewitness reports.

And somehow or another you've come up with:

"ready to blow away the Mahdi Army vehicles as they approached, Tuesday's kidnapping would not have been possible.

On what evidence, Juan? The jaish are no saints, I'd be the last to say they are. I'd like something more than mere assertion for that statment though.

mfi

 
At 7:50 PM, Blogger Jaraparilla said...

Gandhi's Plan For Peace In Iraq

Here are some concrete and much-needed steps that will make an IMMEDIATE difference to the situation on the ground:

1. Bush must announce immediately that the USA will be withdrawing 100% of its forces from Iraq as soon as possible. He must also pledge to remove US government advisorsfrom Baghdad.

2. Bush must announce immediately that the USA will not be maintaining permanent military bases in Iraq. He must also hand the Green Zone and other US-held assets over to the Iraqi Government.

3. The USA must immediately stop pressuring the Iraqi government to sign the proposed Oil Law, which will give US-based Big Oil control of Iraq's oil resources for generations to come. The Iraqi government must announce immediately that any changes to laws governing revenue from Iraq's oil resources will need to be approved by the Iraqi people in a referendum.

4. The current Iraqi government must immediately announce new elections, to be held after the last US forces have withdrawn.

5. The USA must immediately pledge to finance these elections, and the UN must be prepared to monitor them and deploy peace-keeping forces at short notice. The USA must also finance these UN missions.

5. Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and other regional powers must immediately pledge to respect Iraq's borders and support the elected government.

These simple steps will have the immediate effect of removing support for fanatical anti-US propaganda and terrorist groups. They will convince people that there is a peace dividend to be reaped if only they can wait for US forces to withdraw and elections to be held.

The Iraqi people have already shown that they are more than capable of holding their country together (mostly through religious and tribal cohesion) during such a period of instability.

These are immediate steps which can easily be done right now. In particular, let me say this:

If Bush is not prepared to renounce permanent US military bases and control of Iraqi oil, nobody should take all this talk of US withdrawal seriously.

As for withdrawing "with honour", the most honorable thing the USA can do now is to honestly confess to past mistakes, including the political manipulation of WMD intelligence, pledge to make amends to the Iraqi people, and hold those responsible for this disaster accountable.

 
At 9:54 PM, Blogger sherm said...

I wish that when Generals like Abizaid testify before congress they read into the record a preamble such as this:

"I wish to make it clear that the testimony I am about to give is completely consistant with, and supportive of, administration policies. My purpose in being here is to lend the dignity and respect of the uniform to these policies. Please do not interpret my testimony to be the best judgements of an officer with my 40 years of experience. Such judgements will be amply covered in my memoirs upon retirement."

 
At 2:00 AM, Blogger karlof1 said...

Hi Ghandi,

I agree with your proposals as they echo my own. However, the only way they have a chance of implementation is through the total overhaul of our current executive branch through impeachment. And the way things look now is for that to happen WE THE PEOPLE will have to rise-up and make it reality. Indeed, it looks like even a phased withdrawl will only be implemented through impeachment.

 
At 10:12 AM, Blogger John Koch said...

You write: "Give them armored vehicles, tanks, helicopter gunships, and a nice wood-panelled room where they can negotiate with one another."

Who is "them"? Sunni or Shia commanders? It's guaranteed that whoever controls the copters would have upper hand in suppressing an opponent's militia formations or havens. Instead of reading about abductions by thugs "disguised in police uniforms," we'd soon read about "aerial attacks" on Sadr City by helicopters "disguised as Iraqi aircraft." Ministries and perhaps even the Green Zone would be targets. Next: a coup. Finally: the next Saddam.

The command and control of heavy weapons and aircraft would be the deciding factor in the "monopoly of force" that underlies the surviving regime. It would nulify any talks staged in paneled rooms. And, yes, it would suppress the opposition if the decision makers had no qualms about carnage.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home