“…the escalation has failed to produce the intended results”
That’s Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, in a letter to President Bush earlier this month. So much earlier, in fact, that the “escalation”, and operation Phantom Thunder had not yet even commenced.
And today?
SIX months ago, the U.S.- led Coalition force in Iraq appeared to be largely in self-defense mode, allowing terrorists and insurgents much latitude in parts of Baghdad and the troubled provinces of Anbar and Diyala. At the same time, the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki appeared to be engaged in a broad political offensive.
Today we have what looks like a reversal of the two situations - with dynamism in the military field but lethargy in the political. The Coalition has increased its effective force by almost 20,000 men and, under its new commander, Gen. David Petraeus, has moved into offensive gear.
I’ll leave this as an exercise for you, dear reader: Do you believe that the Senate Majority Leader and the Speaker of the House of Representatives were uninformed, at the time they made those comments, that operation Phantom Thunder, and it’s subcomponent, operation Arrowhead Ripper were nearly set to launch?
Of course they weren’t. Harry and Nancy knew full well that these major offensives were very near the GO phase, so their collective reaction was what? Declare failure, as quickly as possible, before news reports regarding the inevitable crush of disorganized, ill-equipped, long on ideology but short on military skills Al-Qaeda in Iraq by our own organized to the hilt, well equipped, long on competency but keeping their ideologies to themselves American soldiers started to hit the presses.
And that’s par for the course, isn’t it? That’s where the netroots have driven their Democratic Senators and Congress members — It’s more important to declare defeat preemptively, than to wait out the initial days, at the very least, of a critical new operation series that’s been building up for months, in order to milk the maximum partisan advantage out of the planning period of said operation.
h/t Glenn Reynolds
Update: Welcome again, Instapundit readers! To see what else is being discussed here today, take a look at the “Top Posts” list over in the sidebar.
Filed under: Democrats, Election 2008, Harry Reid, Home Alone, Iraq, Military, Nancy Pelosi, Politics
And in the 10 days since Leader Reid and Speaker Pelosi wrote that letter 40 Americans (and 2 Brits) have been killedin Iraq, the famous Al-Askariyah mosque in Samarra — formerly known as the “Golden Mosque” until the dome was blown up last year, and one of the holiest sites for Shiite Muslims — was bombed again and both of its minarets toppled, a number of Sunni mosques around the country have been destroyed or damaged in revenge attacks, a huge truck bomb detonated near another historic Shiite mosque in Baghdad killing 87 and wounding 214 (at last count), the Shiite Sadr faction has suspended its participation in the Iraqi parliament, the main Sunni bloc in parliament announced that it will also boycott sessions unless the Sunni Parliament Speaker is reinstated, a survey by Foreign Policy magazine ranked Iraq as the second-most unstable country in the world (up from fourth last year and hard on the heels of Sudan), dozens of corpses have turned up on the streets of Baghdad every day, and the super-secure Green Zone has been mortared and rocketed repeatedly.
I’m not seeing any light at the end of the tunnel here. Just more and blacker darkness.
And the whole point of the surge was to “buy space” for the Iraqis to work out some political solutions to some of the more daunting problems facing the new and weak Iraqi government. Since this idea of a surge was announced (over the objections of a number of American military leaders) and implemented, the political situation in Iraq has certainly not improved and may have actually deteriorated. I hope it works. But so far there is no evidence of that.
twc:
Do you, really, “hope it works”? Is there really “no evidence” that things have improved? With all due respect, perhaps you’re not paying attention.
True, there are big challenges that remain in Iraq, not the least of which is the influence of Iran and Syria. But, there are promising signs in Anbar Province, where Al Qaeda has finally outworn its welcome. The Kurdish region in the north is quite stable. Seven of the 18 provinces are now controlled by Iraqi forces. In addition, 95 Iraqi battalions are in the lead in more than half of Iraq’s territory, which doesn’t count the huge swath of land in Anbar Province. Source: http://www.defenselink.mil/home/dodupdate/iraq-update/Handovers/index.html
We all want Democracy to succeed in the Middle East, and it will likely take longer than any of us would like. But, let’s have an honest discussion about the true metrics of progress, rather than succumbing to political ideology.
This is not about politics; it is about freedom.
Yes I do, really, hope it works, Rob. And I can assure you that I am paying very close attention. Close enough to know that the calm in al-Anbar province, while a very good thing, is only the result of an alliance of convenience between Sunni tribal leaders and the U.S. military as a result of the fact that, as you say, Al Q has worn out its welcome. Those leaders are quite willing to accept American firepower, arms, money and assistance to deal with an outfit that they see as their enemy for the time being. They are certainly not on board behind the Iraqi national government. In fact, the Shiite-dominated Maliki government is unhappy with this development, because they perceive it — probably accurately — as the U.S. arming and assisting their mortal enemies against whom they will eventually square off for control of such of the country as remains at that time. The Sunnis, such as those in Diyala province where Baquba is, where our troops are engaged in a major operation right now, don’t trust the Iraqi Army because much of it is Shiite. The Kurdish region is relatively stable, but the emphasis is on “relative.” It also harbors the PKK force, which is on the list of international terrorist groups and has killed 35,o0o Turks over the last 23 years. The Turkish army has massed on the northern Iraqi border and the generals have said that they are simply awaiting the order to cross into Iraq and “clean out” the PKK bases. Meanwhile, a referendum on the northern oil capital of Kirkuk is scheduled for later this year might well touch off the ethnic tensions that are simmering just below the surface between Kurds, Sunni Arabs, Shiites, Turkmen, and others in that region. It may appear stable relative to some parts of Iraq, but I wouldn’t want to bet that it will remain so — much as I hope that it does.
And I do. I am trying to have an honest discussion about the situation, Rob. I do not believe I am “succumbing to political ideology.” You and I may disagree, but that doesn’t make me an ideologue and you honest. It just means we disagree.
Do you really believe that the situation in Iraq is improving? If so, when did that start?
twc: I think the point of the post may have influenced Rob’s response to you, in that what I was discussing was the eagerness of the Democratic leadership to declare the surge a failure before any of its operational components were actually activated. It’s very easy to carp from the sidelines of any action, when one doesn’t have much skin in the game, and given even Democrats who voted for the AUMF have distanced themselves from their votes (hypocritically in my mind, as hindsight is almost always 20/20), I think their skin factor is pretty damned low right now.
I agree with you that the Maliki government is as hapless as could be, and you may be surprised to know that I’m in agreement with many lefty bloggers that a Shiite government was one of the worst possible outcomes of the Iraqi elections. In addition to granting legitimacy to Al-Sadr, it foments the perception of persecution of the Sunnis for crimes not all of them supported during Saddam’s regime, and sadly, our own de-Baathification strategy contributed to that.
As you may or may not be aware, however, I’m a veteran, and many of my political posts reflect a concern on my part for the damage I think the Democratic partisans are doing to the military aspects of our campaign in Iraq. There is, of course, a diplomatic and political component to our overall plan there, but I think the left (and therefore the Democratic leadership) spend far too much time attacking any moves made in the strategic force category. As a Democrat myself, I reject these efforts to obtain partisan political advantages by undermining the surge before General Petraeus has had an opportunity to fully implement it, as I hope any reasonable person would do.
The factors you comment on are all obviously important, but where your commentary breaks down is in your assertion that you’ve seen no evidence of an improvement in the political situation in Iraq. This post wasn’t referencing the political situation, but the security situation, and my belief is that it’s far too early to judge the success of the surge at this point.
[...] No Comments Do me a favor, if you would, dear readers, and weigh in on the ongoing discussion to this post. I think it may turn out to be one of the most productive we’ve had here to [...]
[...] “…the escalation has failed to produce the intended results” That’s Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, in a letter to President Bush earlier this month. So much earlier, in fact, […] [...]
What has truly changed in the ’strategy’ of the past four years that one would expect different results ? When nobody except the President says a program will work and the chap he puts in charge says it will only work if certain parameters are met - and they aren’t - excuse me for fully expecting the sum total of professional analysis to be vindicated over rhetoric.
Opit: For one thing, the rules of engagement have changed. For another, I think we finally have a field commander who understands counterinsurgency tactics and strategy, and despite the caterwauling of the left, isn’t beholden to the Bush administration to the extent Generals Casey, Franks, and Abizaid were. David Petraeus doesn’t owe his success in the military to any political actors whatsoever, he’s a soldier’s soldier — The closest to Omar Bradley we’ve had since Norman Schwarzkopf left active duty.
As I said before, I’m 100% with you guys on the deficiencies of the Iraqi government, and I think Nouri al-Maliki is a clown. Nevertheless, improving the security situation in Baghdad and its neighboring provinces is a worthy goal, if you believe we need to demonstrate we’ve done all that’s possible to help the Iraqis establish and maintain a centralized government.
That centralized government may be an abject failure, but the responsibility for that can’t rest on our shoulders, unless you think we should have shrugged off national elections and installed our own puppet regime.
Joe - the Iraqis called the execution of Saddam “American Puppet theater”. It was a wry jest with more than one possible interpretation. I’ve read Iraqi blogs enough to know what is thought of al-Maliki : ‘idiot’ would be kind.
The oil companies are still wrenching the situation to put some kind of farcial o.k. on the theft of oil.
There is no question about ’should’ have America installed a puppet regime. America did.
MSM, or big media, is no big surprise. The Daytona Beach News Journal has been claiming defeat for some time now. It started before this offensive got going and is on the front page as well as the OpEd page - no difference there anymore! Ever notice how well the MSM coordinates their own offensives? Oh yeah, they still love the troops though.
Joe: I don’t see how you can separate the security situation from the political situation — they’re inextricable. And I don’t expect our political leaders to do so.
I don’t mean this in a sarcastic way, but this is not a war game. It’s a war. As a veteran, I’m sure you don’t need me to tell you that wars are political in many ways, and this one even more than most. I understand the intended result of the surge to be improving the overall situation in Iraq. I see no evidence of that. (Which is not to say, of course, that the picture is 100% negative. There are always some positive aspects of any situation. Oscar Schindler saved a number of Jewish individuals at great personal risk, but the Holocaust was not “an improvement” for European Jewish communities). My concern, among others, is for the damage that this war is doing to the U.S. military. We’re grinding it to the bone, and beyond — for nothing.
I take your point, that the full complement of troops slated for the surge has only recently arrived and the operations designed for that stage have only just begun. But that does not mean that the surge cannot be doomed to failure already. And it looks to me like it is. I think Reid and Pelosi were right and I have no problem with their saying that.
And today the commander of Operation Arrowhead Ripper, said that the Iraqi forces are not capable of maintaining control of the areas of the city of Baquba that the Americans had cleared of insurgents. “They’re not quite up to the job yet,” said Brig. Gen. Mick Bednarek. He estimated that it would take months before Iraqi troops could hold the city’s western neighborhoods and outlying villages. Meanwhile, the commander of the Third Infantry Division voiced a similar assessment about the capacity of Iraqi forces to maintain security in the capital city. “There’s just not enough of them” to secure parts of Baghdad that had been cleared of insurgents by American troops, said Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch.
Who is more responsible with the lives and limbs of American troops — those politicians who are ordering them yet again to take and clear cities that they know will just fall back into the hands of the insurgents, or those who want to begin to bring an end to this badly-conceived misadventure?
Joe: What bad political motive do you imagine that Republican Senator Richard Lugar has to want to “declare failure . . . before news reports of” the success of the surge?
This war is a fiasco. Some of the most respected foreign-policy and national security voices in the Republican party realize that. The leaders of the Democratic party — and yes, even the liberals — are right on this. On the most important public policy decision of the last 40 years, President Bush has been disastrously wrong.
twc: Lugar could be pulling a Hagel, for all I know…it’s hardly a surprise that Republicans are beginning to kick the lame duck Bush in hopes of salvaging their own electoral prospects. I think they are wrong to do so in this regard…there are plenty of reasons to kick that lame duck around that don’t involve declaring a battlefield mission a defeat before it’s even implemented.
I guess I should make clear that I really, really don’t hold any brief for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, or any of the other architects of this war…my brief is for the soldiers and officers on the ground. I don’t like to see any politician, of any stripe use them as brickbats in their bullshit games.
I’m pretty plugged in to military matters, although I don’t often write about them (I’m a political junkie, not a military affairs junkie :-), and the argument that the Army is being ground to dust has been bounced around since the beginning of this war. I freaked out over the extension of tours back in April, and I remain outraged at every single mistake that’s been made in Iraq, but the Army, while it’s closer to danger than before, is by no means stretched too thin. That’s not to say it won’t be in a Friedman unit or two if Bush & Co. continue to bungle, but I have a very high opinion of General Petraeus, and I think he’s going to be brutally honest at his September report. If news remains more negative than positive, I’ll support a full withdrawal at that point…(even ahead of my current personal deadline of December 31) I have no desire to see our young men and women placed on the line for Nouri al-Maliki’s incompetence, or the incompetence of our own administration.
I also, however, don’t want them coming home with the perception that the Democratic party undermined them, and their mission, purely for partisan political gain…and I guarantee you, if Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi continue their current rhetoric and hyperbole, that’s what’s going to happen. If this mission is a failure, let them hear it from their commanders, and especially from their commander in chief, hopefully along with one hell of an apology. If nothing else, these men and women need to know that it was the mission parameters, and bad, bad planning and management that failed, not their own best efforts. If you really want to avoid a demoralized, circa 1975 military…especially if you want to avoid Democrats shouldering all of the blame for it, this is very important to keep in mind.
I’m inclined to agree with you, and the liberals there…but I’m willing to let the history books tell that tale.
Fair enough, Joe. Although Lugar just got re-elected (easily, I believe) last year, so I certainly don’t he is trying to salvage his own re-election prospects. I think he’s speaking his mind. You make some good points.
BTW Joe When it comes to the purpose behind Iraq being installing democracy in the Middle East, I’d like a chance to sample whatever you’re smoking. Nonetheless, I suspect ‘Mountain Runner’ might be more agreeable to your tastes than most of my links.
I never said Democracy — what I mentioned in the comments above was a centralized government. What form that government will take is, and should be out of our purview…yes, even if it results in an Islamic state. We bought the tickets to the prom, but we don’t get a vote on the prom queen.
In terms of the “democracy project”, here’s what I wrote more recently:
One for you. I should really learn how to read.
LOL, if we’re keeping score, this is the first I’m aware of it :-)
No worries.
[...] Reid, you’ll recall, has already declared the surge to be a failure. It’s certain that he’s not going to give an honest ear or a fair evaluation to GEN [...]
“I freaked out over the extension of tours back in April, and I remain outraged at every single mistake that’s been made in Iraq, but the Army, while it’s closer to danger than before, is by no means stretched too thin. That’s not to say it won’t be in a Friedman unit or two if Bush & Co. continue to bungle, but I have a very high opinion of General Petraeus, and I think he’s going to be brutally honest at his September report. If news remains more negative than positive, I’ll support a full withdrawal at that point…(even ahead of my current personal deadline of December 31) I have no desire to see our young men and women placed on the line for Nouri al-Maliki’s incompetence, or the incompetence of our own administration.”
So what are your thoughts now, Joe