Daily Alert Archives

Withdrawal Isn't Retreat

(Los Angeles Times) Edward N. Luttwak - President Bush rightly insists that the U.S. cannot abandon Iraq to the insurgents - a murderous gathering of Arab Sunni supremacists, Saddam Hussein nostalgics, and Salafist terrorists. These last fanatics would become even more dangerous if invigorated by victory in Iraq. But in presenting the victory of the killers as the only alternative to a failing military occupation, Bush is entirely wrong. It is the least likely of all possible outcomes. As U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad keeps reminding us, about 80% of Iraqis are not Sunni Arabs or Baathists, let alone Salafists, out to kill as many non-Sunnis as they can. That 80% majority consists mostly of Arab Shiites and Kurds of all creeds, who jointly dominate the ranks of the fledgling Iraqi army and police force. Because both those forces are still lacking in morale and cohesion, it may be more important and necessary in the meantime for both Kurds and Arab Shiites to have their own well-armed militias. If U.S. forces are withdrawn, the insurgents would not be left triumphantly victorious in the field. They would face much more numerous Arab Shiite and Kurdish militias, as well as the largest part of the new army and police force. What we have now are U.S. troops interposed between the insurgents and our allies in Iraq, in effect protecting our enemies from our friends. As long as U.S. troops stand between them and the insurgents, there is no necessity, no incentive, and no opportunity for joint Kurd-Shiite action. But things are likely to change very quickly if U.S. forces disengage. The writer is a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
2005-10-12 00:00:00
Full Article