Liberal "Hawks" and Iraq

[wyldwolf]

Kevin Drum of the Washington Monthly's Political Animal threw down a blunt challenge last night to Democrats who don't support an early fixed date for withdrawal from Iraq, basically suggesting they don't have a clue about what to do and simply don't want to appear "weak" for cynical political reasons.

He cited my last post--a brief discussion and link to a couple of New Republic articles--as evidence of this cluelessness, if not the cynicism.

Well, I didn't know I wasn't allowed to write about Iraq without articulating a full-blown plan for the country, but speaking only for myself, yeah, I have a few thoughts about what we should say and do, based in part on Larry Diamond's long-standing recommendations:

1) Publicly announce the United States is abandoning any plans for permanent military bases in Iraq to make it absolutely clear our presence is temporary.

2) Publicly announce benchmarks that will trigger withdrawal of American troops, including approval of a constitution and election of a permanent government; specific levels of trained Iraqi troops and other security forces; and renunciation of demands by major Iraqi communities that are incompatible with a stable and pluralistic regime (e.g., Kurdish right to secede, Sunni Arab privileges in a strong central government, Iranian-style Islamic Republic).

3) Initiate direct negotiations with insurgents.

4) Renounce any public or private-sector U.S. designs for control of Iraqi natural resources

5) Launch an internationalized reconstruction effort which explicitly renounces U.S. exclusive privileges, with special attention to assistance from Sunni Arab countries

The goal would be to leave Iraq with a half-decent chance of maintaining a sustainable government without civil war, foreign domination, or a permament base of operations and recruitment for al Qaeda. The main strategy would be to convince, through carrots and sticks, the Kurds, Sunni Arabs, and Shi'a to step back from their maximalist demands, while creating trans-communal political and security institutions. The philosophy would be to dramatically invest Iraqis with complete responsibility for their common future. And while they would not provide a guaranteed, fixed date for final U.S. withdrawal, the benchmarks would immediately create tests for Iraqis that would either lead to greater stability in the country ad large U.S. troop withdrawals in a matter of months, or would make it clear it truly is time to cut our losses and leave with a brief effort at damage control.

Now, there are all sorts of objections that can legitimately be made about every line I've written above, but the same is obviously true about every other approach, including "timed withdrawal," which even its advocates admit will likely lead to a failed state and chaos. And if you think my suggestions are stupid, then check out the very detailed plan articulated by Wes Clark, another opponent of "timed withdrawal," who has forgotten more about military operations and nation-building than Kevin or I will ever know.


http://www.newdonkey.com/

[grumpy old fart]

1. Gen. Clarke's option is the only one aside from just leaving now.

And Bush will do neither. Either would be admitting to a mistake. This administration NEVER made a mistake. EVER.

These are the two options to put on the table. Bush will do neither, of course, though the mounting death toll will eventually lead to some bogus "victory" declaration and slow troop with drawl. The deaths incurred by this lack of a plan mean little to these monsters.

[Totally Committed]

4. And, it's "C L A R K" (no E on the end).

That particular misspelling is done in some circles as a sign of disrespect for Wes. I know you didn't mean such a thing here. :)

[grumpy old fart]

6. Absolutely not. Thanks for the heads up. n/t

[tocqueville]

2. Clark's option not realistic

it's basically what the current administration has been trying to do.
maybe Clark would have the clout to apply it 2009, but it would be far to late anyway.

The plan above is more realistic, but it must involve direct participation from the Syrians, Jordanians and Iranians

Sadly I think that things have already gone too far. Plenty of leaders in the Muslim world are letting things deteriorate for two reasons :

- they want the US to lose the war and be taught a lesson
- there are selfish reasons of regaining previously claimed
territory under Saddam. A civil war is perfect for that.

[Totally Committed]

3. Steve Clemons, from "The Washington Note" likes The General's Plan:

"There's been some talk lately about what the Dems' plan is for Iraq. I found this comment in Steve Clemons' Washington Note blog on Ari Berman's "The Strategic Class" piece in The Nation interesting. Speaking of George Soros' 75th birthday party he says:

'General Wes Clark was also there, and while I won't quote him at this point (as I want him to write up our conversation as an op-ed), we had an extensive conversation about Iran and Iraq, and I thought Clark's suggestions on what America should be doing now on both fronts were novel and deserve serious attention. I'm hoping to have General Clark join us at the terrorism conference I am helping to organized on September 6-7 in Washington -- but even if he can't be there -- by way of this blog, I'm encouraging him to get his action plan out into the public.'"

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000894.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2007418#2017866

**** **** **** ****

"For the next several days, I will be providing regular updates about the themes and issues, as well as speakers, that will be part of a major national policy forum on terrorism that I am helping to organize in Washington on September 6 & 7.

For those of you outside Washington, we will have a high-quality, real time webcast of the two-day event.

I am pleased to report that my discussion this past weekend in the Hamptons with General Wesley Clark, former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO and candidate for President of the United States, has led in part to him joining us as one of the featured speakers in the conference. He has some novel and important views to share on U.S. defense policy, terrorism, and our circumstances today in Iraq and with Iran.

He will be appearing at lunch on Tuesday, September 6th.

More later on the rest."

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2007418#2017866

[welshTerrier2]

5. of what value is this plan with bush in the WH?

the US will "offer its word" about not having designs on Iraq's oil and natural resources ... we will NOT remain as occupiers once some set of objectives is met ...

will bush agree to this? or is this plan to be implemented when a Democratic President takes office in January, 2009?

now one could certainly raise the exact same objection to those who call for immediate or near-term withdrawal ... but there is a very real difference ... there is a very strong tide of increased opposition to the war ... most Americans don't believe we can "succeed" in Iraq ... there is a very real political consequence to republicans who continue to support the occupation ... they're watching the trends very carefully and they're very worried ...

it is not clear that the program you propose would gain the political support necessary to get bush to change America's direction and public statements ...

while i have all sorts of issues with the idea of achieving anything at anytime in Iraq while the US remains as occupiers, the first problem with your "here's our plan" would be making bush comply with it ... how do you propose to "get there from here"?

[Donna Zen]

7. Bipartisan meeting with Clemons

There are several issues to be discussed at the Clemons' meeting:

• terrorism... aside from bush's empty rhetoric their are people in the world who want to cause great harm to innocent people. They are probably not unified in their reasoning, but only in their goals. It is the members of that group who are sick and tired of American policy, a policy that does not represent America's stated ideals, that need to be addressed.

• foreign policy... unilateral v multilateral. Where do we go from here, and how do we get on track? Foreign policy now is intrinsically linked to domestic policy, as a nation (and since I live here, I like to see it a successful democracy) we are in danger of sliding into the 3rd World if we continue this madness. More tea?

• the war... if we stay, Iraqis and Americans are fucked; if we leave, Iraqis and Americans are fucked. I know that there are those who believe that the Iraqis would be happy and all join hands to rebuild their nation, and there are minutes, even hours, when I'm ready to reach that conclusion. Nevertheless, I read and read. I read Juan Cole's blog especially, because he gives detailed information that is not commonly found. Cole is also not a spin-meister, but rather he too is someone who is looking for answer--a way out. To date, he has not found one that does not insure long term negative consequences.

The papers that General Clark wrote were written some time ago. Perhaps he has not changed his set of options, but I rather doubt that. He tends to think logically doing something that he terms: "necking down." As options leave the table, as the bush administration day in and day out continues to fuck up an already completely fucked up mess, I would think that the remaining options became fewer. Clemons refers to "novel" ideas that need to be written up, this doesn't sound like the older papers. Wes Clark's forte is that he is an out-of-box thinker. We can only hope. One item on which Clark has been consistent and insistent, is that this cannot be solved with guns; we must engage the region in diplomacy.

Anyway, the conference sounds interesting, and Clemons has promised a quality web-cast. I hope to watch it.

Iraq is far worse than Vietnam. Before the war began I wrote on a different forum. The thread title that was chosen for postings about the build up and the lies was: The Forever War. The political shit-heads that got us into this can go fuck themselves.