Iraq: No way out

10 September 2007 |permalink | email article

Gen. David Petraeus begins testimony to Congress today, the eve of 9/11, on conditions in Iraq. It ‘s the most anticipated appearance by an Army officer since Gen. William Westmoreland traveled from Vietnam 40 years ago to address a joint session on Capitol Hill when there were serious public doubts about that war.

(Westmoreland failed but The Los Angeles Times wonders, perhaps prematurely, whether the general is another Ulysses S. Grant, who didn’t.)

The New York Times led Sunday with a 4,000-word examination (18 reporters) on the American troop “surge” in Iraq, finding only modest signs of progress far short of the goals that President Bush stated when he announced the troops buildup seven months ago.

In a letter to his troops last week, Petraeus expressed disappointment with the lack of political reconciliation, paving the way for another White House-directed return in six months to allow more time for Iraqi politics to catch up with improving security conditions.

He’ll talk about tactical military successes, notably in Anbar province and an alliance with U.S. funded Sunni sheiks fighting Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia and related jihadist movements elsewhere around Baghdad.

But “staying the course” is far different than achieving victory – a political solution to the war and entrenched sectarian violence in which Sunnis have virtually been cleansed from Baghdad by the Shiite-controlled government.

The surge may no longer be the issue but whether Petraeus can provide the Bush with an exit strategy to end a disastrous occupation. Will Congress respond complacently or, like Sen. Joe Biden on “Meet the Press,” question the degree of military progress.

Fred Kaplan, who writes the “War Stories” column for Slate, asks some compelling ones: “What is the new strategy? What are the core missions of U.S, forces? What can they accomplish, with a fail chance of success, at reduced levels? What is the meaning of success?”

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll suggests Petraeus’s assessment will exaggerate progress in Iraq, but few think it will shift Bush’s policy. The survey suggests a slight increase in the number who believe the situations improving, a tribute to a propaganda-driven media blitz by conservatives.

Petraeus, the public face of the White House, addresses the National Press Club on Wednesday. Will the Gang of 500 fawn in awe over his military resume, or squeeze some brutally frank candor out of him?

This much is clear. Despite bipartisan calls for troop downsizing, nearly every Washington politician understands there will not be a total exit but continued presence in Iraq for a long time. 

Petraeus recently told a Illinois Democratic congresswoman it could be nine or more 10 years, meaning children now in grade school could end in military service there.

The continuing quaqmire underscores Bush’s reckless lack of judgment in seeking retribution for 9/11 in Iraq, not taking out bin Ladin and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.

In a new book, Bush talks about “sprinting to the finish” and “playing for October-November,” meaning he’s determined to hand off the mess to the next president in January 2009. For Republican hopefuls, his failed legacy dooms any chance for retention of the White House.

284