Untitled Document
The U.S. strategy in Iraq is failing, and it is time
for something new. Withdrawing American troops would not leave the vacuum
that many suppose or the consequent bloodbath they fear. Getting the United
States out would open the door for two other powerful groups to enter and
lead the peacemaking effort. One group is the world community. The other is
the Iraqi people themselves. It will take strength and courage for the U.S. to
leave Iraq. It’s not only Bush-administration stubbornness that
resists a changed course but also American pride and a cultural imperative
to finish what we have started. Even the Democratic candidates for
president say that they plan to leave American troops in Iraq for years to
come. When former Secretary of State Colin Powell said of Iraq, “We
broke it, and now we have to fix it,” he was not only taking
responsibility but also perpetuating the problem. The responsible thing to
do is get out of the way. Writing in the New York
Times on “The War as We Saw It,” a
group of Army infantrymen and noncommissioned officers who have spent the
last 15 months deployed in Iraq said that the U.S. military is the problem,
not the solution. “To believe that Americans, with an occupying force
that long ago outlived its reluctant welcome, can win over a recalcitrant
local population and win this counterinsurgency is far-fetched.” They
describe the confusing array of actors: Sunni extremists, Al Qaeda
terrorists, Shiite militiamen, criminals, and armed tribes. “In
short, we operate in a bewildering context of determined enemies and
questionable allies, one where the balance of forces on the ground remains
entirely unclear. . . . a vast majority of Iraqis feel increasingly
insecure and view us as an occupation force that has failed to produce
normalcy after four years and is increasingly unlikely to do so as we
continue to arm each warring side.”
The soldiers continue: “In the end, we need to
recognize that our presence may have released Iraqis from the grip of a
tyrant, but that it has also robbed them of their self-respect. They will
soon realize that the best way to regain dignity is to call us what we are
— an army of occupation — and force our withdrawal. Until that
happens, it would be prudent for us to increasingly let Iraqis take center
stage in all matters, to come up with a nuanced policy in which we assist
them from the margins but let them resolve their differences as they see
fit.”
The Iraqi people have experienced tremendous
violence, bloodshed, and displacement. Their educated and affluent are
fleeing the country. But there are 20 million Iraqis still living in Iraq,
continuing to hope for a better future. “Iraqis continue on,”
says Mary Trotochaud, an American peace activist who worked in Baghdad with
the American Friends Service Committee from 2003 to 2005. “Their
faith is what sustains them. It’s amazing to see the spirit that
people have. The hope for Iraq lies in the people of Iraq.” Iraqis
can ward off terrorist cells themselves; the most effective
counterinsurgency is homegrown. Whatever faction quells violence and
restores electricity will win support. Political reconciliation in Iraq
will occur sooner if the U.S. stops telling Iraqis what’s good for
them. If the United States steps back, other nations may
step forward. True, there has been no visible movement toward international
leadership on peace lately. But if the U.S. begins withdrawing troops,
space will open up for the rest of the world to enter the peace process.
The U.S. will be a party to any peace talks, but it can’t initiate
them. The broker role must fall to a more neutral and disinterested power,
one that could claim independence from the United States. A coalition of
Iraq’s neighbors in the Middle East might well fill that role. The
point is, George W. Bush’s rhetoric to the contrary, the world is
full of nations that value justice and leaders who want peace in Iraq.
Leadership will emerge.
Contact Fletcher Farrar at ffarrar@illinoistimes.com.
This article appears in Aug 16-22, 2007.
