MERIP
Middle East Research and Information Project
Middle East Report
Middle East Report Online
Newspaper Op-Eds

MiddleEastDesk.org
Press Room
Background
Contact Info
Subscribe
Back Issues
Internships
Giving
Search
Subscribe Online to
Middle East Report

Order a subscription and back issues to the award-winning magazine Middle East Report.

Click here for the order page.

SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS

Report of the Task Force for a Responsible Withdrawal from Iraq June 2008 [Click to view PDF]

Primer on Palestine, Israel and the Arab-Israeli Conflict
Click here (PDF)

[Click here for HTML version]

 

 

 

 

Iraq 2012

Chris Toensing

Caterwaul Quarterly (Summer 2008)

Spring in Baghdad saw stadiums open to shelter yet another wave of refugees, displaced from the capital's eastern slums by the combined assault of the US military and its proxy Iraqi forces upon the Mahdi Army loyal to the young Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. The fresh attempt to “root out” the Mahdi Army from its birthplace of Sadr City was the latest battle in Iraq's complex and ever shifting civil war—a war in which the US military, in a sense, is but the largest and most heavily armored militia. At the very least, the fighting in Sadr City shows that the relative calm of late 2007 and early 2008 was indeed “fragile and reversible,” in the words of Gen. David Petraeus. More likely, it demonstrates that the winter's decline in violence was only a lull in chaos with no end in sight. Yet in the United States, one might be forgiven for thinking the war in Iraq is over. 

Though deeply unpopular, the war has steadily receded from public consciousness, thanks to economic woes, the exhausting Democratic presidential primary and an easily gulled mainstream media. While Iraq still ranks high on the list of voters' concerns, the bursting of the housing bubble and skyrocketing gas and food prices have focused most Americans' minds on their wallets. The Hillary Clinton campaign's decision in January to race-bait Barack Obama drove the Democratic primary away from the issues into a downward spiral of identity politics and desperate appeals to the ugly side of American political consciousness, culminating in Clinton's suggestion that Obama might be assassinated, as Bobby Kennedy was in 1968. Clinton's long flameout completely absorbed the media's attention during the April testimony of Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker before Congress, right up until her belated bow to the inevitable in early June. The spectacle of the primary was sordid enough without considering its larger political consequences, one of which is that the Bush administration's narrative that “the surge is working” remains essentially intact.

There are ample grounds for challenging this tale of success. Now that the former First Lady has finally stood down, Obama can begin to do so. One reason why Iraq faded from the front page during the Democratic primary is that both he and Clinton pledged to begin withdrawing “combat brigades” from Iraq immediately upon assuming office, meaning that journalists had no conflict between the candidates to report on that score. The general election campaign should provide plenty of that conflict. But there is reason to worry, nevertheless, that Obama will not be able to fulfill his promises to wind down the war—even in the event that those promises are sincere.

Quietly, the Bush administration is negotiating with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki over an agreement that could keep tens of thousands of US troops in Iraq for years after the surge is over. On November 26, 2007, President George W. Bush and Maliki signed a statement of principles for such an agreement, to be concluded before December 31 of this year, when the UN mandate for the so-called Multinational Force in Iraq will expire. Because it will not be a “treaty,” this accord may not be subject to Congressional approval, but it is expected to make the US military presence contingent upon the wishes of the Maliki government, which likely depends on that presence for its political survival. The Iraqi defense minister told CNN that Iraq could “need” a US garrison until 2018. According to Crocker, the agreement may be ready in July. [Ed. note: As this article went to press, negotiations had stalled, but leaders both sides continued to express confidence that differences would be worked out by July.]

In Iraq, this proposed arrangement is a major rallying point for the political opposition. Sadr's followers are among the thousands of Iraqis who have taken to the streets in protest against what they see as Iraqi acquiescence in permanent foreign occupation. The demonstrations frighten the Maliki government enough that its spokesmen have taken to denouncing alleged US negotiating positions in the Iraqi press, if only to create the appearance that they are fighting for Iraqi sovereignty.

Yet in the US, at least among the political class, there is unseemly resignation to the determination of the Bush administration to bequeath the occupation of Iraq to its successor. Certainly, the “mainstream,” Democrat-identified anti-war organizations like MoveOn and Americans Against the Escalation in Iraq are so resigned. At a leadership summit in Washington in mid-January, they agreed to cease pressing Congress to stop funding the massive Iraq deployment. It was a form of unilateral disarmament. Since taking over Congress after the 2006 elections, to be sure, the Democrats have been cowed by the “support the troops” bromide into swallowing their supposedly passionate anti-war feelings. The proper strategy in these circumstances is to keep up the pressure: Democrats should not only be using their legislative majority to curb Bush's freedom of action, they should be using their bully pulpit to make winning ideological arguments against the war, so that the “support the troops” slogan loses its power to intimidate. But the ideological field has been abandoned, and with it, the chances of affecting the outcome. Another $165.4 billion for the war sailed through the Senate in May, and will probably pass the House of Representatives as well.

The irony of this latest preemptive surrender by the Democrats is that the public would listen to alternative prescriptions for the Iraq impasse, if only the Democrats would advertise them, instead of relying solely on old-fashioned Bush bashing. It is no longer news that the Bush administration was duplicitous in selling the war and lazy in planning for the aftermath. When, in January, the highly regarded Center for Public Integrity issued a study documenting 935 false statements made by top Bush administration officials in the leadup to the war, the media just noted it and moved on. The litany of errors during the direct US misrule of Iraq in 2003-2004 is likewise material for the history books. For many Americans, the question has long since ceased to be why the US invaded Iraq, or whether invading Iraq was the right thing to do, but how the US can get out of Iraq in a way that is responsible and minimizes further spilling of blood.

It is the Republicans, oddly enough, who have moved most boldly to speak to Americans looking for the answer. In May, John McCain predicted what the country would look like at the end of his hoped-for first term. “By January 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom,” he said. “The Iraq war has been won.” A few pundits scoffed that, in positing a “timetable” for withdrawal, McCain was effacing the bright line between himself and the Democrats, but they completely missed the point. The septuagenarian senator's speech exemplified the classic Republican gambit: Position the GOP as the party of victory on the battlefield, and the Democrats—by default—become cast as the party of defeat. He is counting on the media to do its part in insinuating his framing of the question into voters' minds.

In the general election campaign, Barack Obama can choose one of two basic lines of counter-argument. One—the object of McCain's fervent desires—is that the Republican is being irresponsible in forecasting what Iraq will look like in 2013 and has no credible plan for ensuring that US troops will be able to leave by that date. That choice will entrap Obama on McCain's home turf of endless debate over who is best qualified to manage the war so that it produces a “success” for the United States. It is worrisome that the National Security Network, one wing of the Democratic administration in waiting, immediately attacked McCain's speech on these grounds of competence. As a man who served and suffered horribly in US uniform, McCain has the upper hand in this type of Iraq debate.

The second possible choice, and by far the more promising one for peace and stability, would move past the notion that the US can somehow withdraw from Iraq without significant consequences for both its strategic position in the Persian Gulf and for Iraq. In this scenario, Obama would disavow the hubris that posits that, having done so much to break Iraq, the US can fix it. Rather, Obama would advocate that the US act to minimize the consequences of its inevitable withdrawal and, in the long term, be generous in assisting Iraq in its recovery from 40 years of war, sanctions and dictatorship. Obama has shown signs of having the courage to choose this course and the rhetorical skill to make the necessary case.

Recent American political history teaches, however, that Obama, terrified of appearing weak, will skate around both of these two options and settle on neither. Should that come to pass, McCain's electoral chances will be greatly enhanced. In the event that Obama wins the White House nonetheless, the win will not be viewed as a popular mandate for the tough decision to withdraw completely from Iraq, and the Republicans will be emboldened in their certain strategy for turning Iraq into the Democrats' war. Past GOP behavior suggests the blueprint for besieging President Barack Obama: Block, through all available means, any genuinely alternative plan for Iraq. Then goad the new commander-in-chief with accusations of defeatism and fecklessness into proposing his own strategy for “victory.” In these cicumstances, Obama will be tempted to test out newly elastic definitions of “combat brigades.” For these reasons, and more, the US occupation of Iraq is poised to be a campaign issue in 2012.

---
Chris Toensing is editor of Middle East Report, published by the Middle East Research and Information Project in Washington, DC.

DonateNow

Search MERIP

MERIP OP-EDS
Sects and the City
 New York Times Magazine
May 17, 2010
Moustafa Bayoumi

I had almost forgotten I’d sent in an application when the e-mail message appeared, like Mr. Big, out of nowhere. “Hi, Moustafa,” it began, as if we were old friends. “Thank you for e-mailing us regarding your interest in working on ‘Sex and the City 2.’ ”

No way. Last August, I half-jokingly answered an e-mail message posted on a list-serv requesting “lots of Middle Eastern men and women” as extras for the second “Sex and the City” movie (opening this week). Although I must have been one of the very few in the tri-state area to possess all the talents requested in the e-mail (legal to work, Middle Eastern and between 18 and 70 years old), I still never thought I would be selected. Two months later, I got the call. Full Story>>

A Web Smaller Than a Divide
 The New York Times
 May 14, 2010
Sinan Antoon

At first glance, there’s a clear need for expanding the Web beyond the Latin alphabet, including in the Arabic-speaking world. According to the Madar Research Group, about 56 million Arabs, or 17 percent of the Arab world, use the Internet, and those numbers are expected to grow 50 percent over the next three years. Many think that an Arabic-alphabet Web will bring millions online, helping to bridge the socio-economic divides that pervade the region. But such hopes are overblown. Full Story>>

A New Conversation Peace
The National (Abu Dhabi)
April 9, 2019
 Chris Toensing

Iyad Allawi, the not terribly popular interim premier of post-Saddam Iraq, is in a position to form a government again because he won over the Sunni Arabs residing north and west of Baghdad in the March 7 elections. The vote, while it did not “shove political sectarianism in Iraq toward the grave,” as Allawi would have it, rekindled the hopes of many that “nationalist” sentiment has asserted itself over communal loyalty. Full Story>>

Arming Yemen Against Al-Qaeda
 The Register Citizen (Torrington, CT)
 January 21, 2010
Sheila Carapico

Americans got a crash course on Yemen for Christmas.

That’s because we’ve wanted to know more about the little-known, dirt-poor country in southwestern Arabia where the “underwear bomber” who tried to blow up a plane—bound for Detroit from Nigeria on Christmas Day—says he was trained. President Barack Obama says, correctly, that “large chunks” of Yemen “are not fully under government control.” So it seems to make sense to strengthen the Yemeni government, to get at “al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula,” as the local gang of Islamist extremists is known. Full Story>>

Christmas is Bittersweet in Bethlehem
 The Milford Daily News (Milford, MA)
 December 24, 2009
George Rishmawi

Bethlehem, Palestine is a special place to celebrate Christmas. It’s home to the Church of the Nativity and the field where shepherds, tending their flocks by night, spotted the star heralding Jesus’ birth. But apart from the historical mystique, here in Bethlehem we celebrate Christmas much like Christians throughout the world. We hang lights from the rooftops. We erect a tree in Manger Square. We host a Christmas market. Our children carol and perform Christmas pageants. Christmas in Bethlehem, as elsewhere, is a time for family, peace, love and joy. Full Story>>

More Troops Won't Do It
 The Herald (New Britain, CT)
 November 13, 2009
Chris Toensing

For the past two months, President Barack Obama has been weighing Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s request to send an additional 40,000 troops to Afghanistan to “disrupt, dismantle and defeat” al-Qaeda. That same effort, according to Obama, entails ensuring that the Taliban can’t regain control of the country. But a military strategy alone won’t beat al-Qaeda or the Taliban. Achieving lasting stability in Afghanistan will require national political reconciliation, the establishment of a functioning, accountable political system, and a credible government. In this respect, the outcome of Afghanistan’s presidential election, marred by cheating, was a step in the wrong direction. Full story>>

Fort Hood Shootings: Again We Will Be Judged for Acts We Didn't Commit
 The Guardian
 November 6, 2009
Moustafa Bayoumi

So much is still unknown about the shooting at Fort Hood Army base and the motives of the alleged shooter, Nidal Malik Hasan, but still I have that same queasy feeling in my stomach that I've had before: this will not be good for Muslims. Full Story>>

Western Sahara Poser for UN
 Reuters (Africa Blog)
 April 28, 2009
Jacob Mundy

Morocco serves as the backdrop for such Hollywood blockbusters as Gladiator, Black Hawk Down and Body of Lies. The country’s breathtaking landscapes and gritty urban neighbourhoods are the perfect setting for Hollywood’s imagination.

Unbeknown to most filmgoers, however, is that Morocco is embroiled in one of Africa’s oldest conflicts - the dispute over Western Sahara. This month the UN Security Council is expected to take up the dispute once more, providing US President Barack Obama with an opportunity to assert genuine leadership in resolving this conflict. But there’s no sign that the new administration is paying adequate attention. Full Story>>

Letters, He Gets Letters
 Bitter Lemons International
March 26, 2009
Chris Toensing

Shortly before assuming office, President Barack Obama was handed a missive signed by such Washington luminaries as ex-national security advisers Zbigniew Brezezinski and Brent Scowcroft, urging him to “explore the possibility” of direct contact with Hamas. One month after he entered the White House, Obama received an epistle from Ahmad Yousef, a Gaza-based spokesman for the Islamist movement, making the same recommendation. “There can be no peace without Hamas,” Yousef told the New York Times when asked about the letter's contents. “We congratulated Mr. Obama on his presidency and reminded him that he should live up to his promise to bring real change to the region.”

There is no word, as yet, on how the foreign policy doyens' message was received, but Yousef's occasioned a huffy US rebuke of the UN Relief Works Agency, whose top official in Gaza, Karen Abu Zayd, passed the letter to Sen. John Kerry while he was visiting the devastated territory in mid-February. Even a single sealed envelope, it seems, creates the appearance that the Obama administration is breaking with the US vow, enunciated first under President George W. Bush, not to speak with Hamas until it agrees to renounce violence, abide by previous Palestinian agreements with Israel and recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Full Story>>

Elections Are Key to Darfur Crisis
 The Montreal Gazette
March 7, 2009
Khalid Medani

It has been quite a week. For the first time, the international community indicted a sitting president of a sovereign state. Omar al-Bashir of Sudan stands accused by the International Criminal Court in The Hague of "crimes against humanity and war crimes" committed in the course of the Khartoum regime's brutal suppression of the revolt in the country's far western province of Darfur. Having indicted two other figures associated with the regime in 2007, ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo began building a case against the man at the top, and on Wednesday, the court issued a warrant for Bashir's arrest. Full Story>>

Out of the Rubble
The National
January 23, 2009
Mouin Rabbani

Speaking to his people on January 18, hours after Hamas responded to Israel’s unilateral suspension of hostilities with a conditional ceasefire of its own, the deposed Palestinian Authority prime minister Ismail Haniyeh devoted several passages of his prepared text to the subject of Palestinian national reconciliation. For perhaps the first time since Hamas’s June 2007 seizure of power in the Gaza Strip, an Islamist leader broached the topic of healing the Palestinian divide without mentioning Mahmoud Abbas by name.

At a press conference the following day convened by Abu Ubaida, the spokesperson of the Martyr Izz al Din al Qassam Brigades, the Hamas military wing, the movement went one step further. “The Resistance”, Abu Ubaida intoned, “is the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people”. Full Story>>

The Horrors of Israel's Peace
Al Ahram Weekly
January 22-28, 2009
Samera Esmeir

Three weeks after the war on Gaza, Israel declared a unilateral ceasefire but refused to terminate its so-called defensive operations. In response, Hamas declared a ceasefire for one week, until the withdrawal of Israeli troops has been completed. For many in the West, the ceasefire might seem like an occasion to celebrate, for the cessation of military hostilities on both sides will perhaps renew the peace process. But there are reasons to be critical of this ceasefire, since it continues the situation in which Israel acts unilaterally. What we are actually witnessing is a new phase of the catastrophe in Gaza. While the characteristics of this phase are not yet known, Israel's violence has become ever more evident. And perhaps this is why Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert did not mention the word "peace" once in the speech he gave to announce the ceasefire. The "peace process" might soon be revealed as the other side of the coin to war -- its continuation by other means -- that simultaneously feeds it. Full Story>>

A Battleground for the Foreseeable Future
Bitter Lemons International
September 11, 2008
Chris Toensing

Bob Woodward’s four books chronicling the wars of President George W. Bush are sensitive barometers of conventional wisdom in Washington. Whereas the first volume, published in 2002 at the height of the self-righteous nationalism gripping the capital after the September 11, 2001 attacks, hailed Bush’s self-confidence in acting to protect the homeland, the 2008 installment depicts the same man as cocksure and incurious. This much is not news. More educational are Woodward’s hints about the worldviews that will outlast this unpopular administration, embedded in the organs of the national security state. Full Story>>

Egypt Stifles Debate in the United States
 Northwest Arkansas Times
 August 27, 2008
Bayann Hamid

The Egyptian regime has once again succeeded in stifling freedom of speech, this time not in Egypt, but in the US. Earlier this month, an Egyptian court convicted a prominent Egyptian-American activist for his outspoken criticism of the regime’s poor human rights record in American public fora. The court accused Saad Eddin Ibrahim, of "tarnishing Egypt's image" abroad. The conviction referred primarily to writings he published in the foreign press; most notably among them an August 2007 op-ed in the Washington Post in which he criticized Egypt's human rights record and questioned the reasons behind US aid to Egypt. Full Story>>

Want to Fight Terrorism? Think Globally, Act Locally
 Globe and Mail (Toronto),
 August 4, 2008
Khalid Mustafa Medani

Militant Islam is under global scrutiny for clues to conditions that foster its rise, and to strategies for reversing that growth. But the key is not in Islamic doctrine, US foreign policy or formal ties to various nations, as many analysts have asserted. It lies at the community level, with clan and local leaders. Full Story>>

Iraq’s Kurds Have to Choose
 Globe and Mail (Toronto)
 July 30, 2008
Joost Hiltermann

Kurdish parties have become kingmakers in Baghdad , and they know it. As no federal government can work without them, they are pulling every available political lever to expand the territory and resources they control, trying to build the foundation of an independent Kurdish state. But even more than territory, they need security. If everyone acts quickly and wisely, that understanding could help resolve one of the Iraq war’s thorniest issues. Full Story>>

Exiting Iraq Is Easier Than They Say
 The Nation (web-only)
 July 16, 2008
Chris Toensing

The debate over the war in Iraq follows a yellowing script: The minute someone suggests that the US move to withdraw its troops, war supporters cry “Havoc!” True to form, when no less a figure than Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki stated he wants a timeline for a US pullout, John McCain summoned the specter of dire consequences. “I’ve always said we’ll come home with honor and with victory and not through a set timetable,” McCain said. In his major foreign policy speech on July 15, Barack Obama affirmed his support for a withdrawal timetable, adding that the US must “get out as carefully as we were careless getting in.” Obama’s position is the correct one, but he, like many other war critics, has done too little to counter the refrain that withdrawal is simply “cutting and running,” a recipe for disaster. Full Story>>
  Home | Contact/Intern | Background Info | Middle East Report | MER Online | Newspaper Op-Eds | Giving
Copyright © MERIP. All rights reserved.