An exit strategy for Iraq now By Tom Hayden

[papau]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-hayden16aug16,0,4396708.story?track=tottext

An exit strategy for Iraq now
By Tom Hayden
TOM HAYDEN is a former state senator and the author of "Street Wars" (Dimensions, 2004).

August 16, 2005

PRESIDENT BUSH HAS so far fended off Cindy Sheehan, a grieving mother demanding to know the "noble purpose" of her son's death in Iraq. However, Bush has been forced to address the existence of the antiwar constituency for perhaps the first time, if only to distort and discredit its message of "troops out now." It is the right moment for the peace movement to turn its slogan into a strategy.

The rallying cry of "out now" expresses the belief that the Iraq war is not worth another minute in lost lives, lost honor, lost taxes, lost allies. But its very simplicity makes the demand easy to ignore or dismiss.

Meanwhile, the administration focuses on the appearance of progress in Iraq (thus its desperate interest in an Iraqi constitution, any constitution). It may well order a token withdrawal of troops to pacify peace sentiment through the 2006 congressional elections. Then, as with Vietnam in 1969, the war is likely to continue.

Those who have been proved right in opposing this war deserve a hearing alongside the military and national security "experts" who have dominated commentary since the March 2003 invasion. It is time to explain "out now" and for peace advocates to propose exit strategies of their own. Otherwise, both political parties will be stuck with the mind-set that an exit is possible only after "stability," meaning a military victory years from now (if ever).

Peace movement advocates have lobbied successfully for members of Congress to hold Capitol Hill forums in mid-September to explore exit strategies. Here is a starting point that is being discussed in peace circles. It is based on deciding now to get out of Iraq and outlining how to do it. The basis of the plan is a shift from a military model to a conflict-resolution model, then to a peace process that ends in a negotiated political settlement alongside a U.S. withdrawal. The main themes are these:

1. First, as confidence-building measures, Washington should declare that it has no interest in permanent military bases or the control of Iraqi oil. It must immediately announce goals for ending the occupation and bringing all our troops home — in months, not years, beginning with an initial gesture by the end of this year.

2. Second, the U.S. should request that the United Nations, or a body blessed by the U.N., monitor the process of military disengagement and de-escalation, and take the lead in organizing a peaceful reconstruction effort.

3. Third, the president should appoint a peace envoy, independent of the occupation authorities, to begin an entirely different mission in Iraq. The envoy should encourage and cooperate in peace talks with Iraqi groups opposed to the occupation, including insurgents, to explore a political settlement.<snip>

[izzybeans]

1. Sounds nice, but his pull out will of Iraq will probably involve the

invasion of Iran.

[evermind]

2. The fact that this will not be implemented shouldn't stop us

arguing for it, imho.

Sounds like a good strategy, assuming a sane government was available to pursue it (... ah, but we wouldn't be needing it then, I suppose).

[endarkenment]

3. 4. US (and its 'coalition') must pay full cost of peace keeping/rebuilding

There is no way that the rest of the world or the Iraqis should pay for this mess.

Tom is of course right: we need to make out now a rational alternative to the pompous insanity that masquerades as the current wisdom.

[Moderator]

4. papau

Per DU copyright rules
please post only four
paragraphs from the
copyrighted news source.


Thank you.

DU Moderator