[lbo-talk] New Iraq Strategy Emerges: First Security, Then Politics

Yoshie Furuhashi critical.montages at gmail.com
Wed Dec 20 01:38:11 PST 2006


Some leftists keep hoping that "a rational section of the ruling class" would compel the White House and Congress to withdraw the US troops from Iraq soon, even in the absence of any American intifada. Not bloody likely. Just as there is no organized left in the USA, there is no organized faction of the US ruling class who are pushing for a rational thing to do in the Middle East. If there were, America would not have invaded Iraq to begin with!

And here comes bad news from Iraq: Sistani makes the second bad decision (after the first bad decision of clamoring for elections under the US occupation and pursuing a sectarian electoral strategy): "Iraq's most venerated Shiite cleric has tentatively approved an American-backed coalition of Shiite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish parties that aims to isolate extremists, particularly the powerful Shiite militia leader Moktada al-Sadr."

<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/world/middleeast/20assess.html> December 20, 2006 Military Analysis New Iraq Strategy Emerges: First Security, Then Politics By MICHAEL R. GORDON

WASHINGTON, Dec. 19 — The debate over whether to increase the American military presence in Baghdad is much more than a dispute over troop levels. It reflects a more fundamental dispute over the American mission.

In proposing to send tens of thousands of additional troops, proponents of reinforcing the American military effort argue that the violence in Iraq is increasing at such an alarming rate that Washington can no longer wait for the newly minted Iraqi security forces to take on the main burden of securing the Iraqi capital.

The United States, they assert, needs to expand its mission by making the protection of the Iraqi population its primary objective.

The calculation is that by sending additional troops and taking up positions in mixed Shiite and Sunni neighborhoods, the American military can finally break the escalating cycle of sectarian killings. Only after restoring some semblance of security, the proponents of a troop increase maintain, can the Bush administration reasonably expect Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki to rein in the Shiite militias.

As President Bush mulls his Iraq strategy, the idea of deploying 20,000 additional American troops or more, at least temporarily, has emerged as a leading option.

<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/washington/20bush.html> December 20, 2006 President Wants to Increase Size of Armed Forces By THOM SHANKER and JIM RUTENBERG

WASHINGTON, Dec. 19 — President Bush said Tuesday that the United States should expand the size of its armed forces, acknowledging that the military had been strained by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and would need to grow to cope with what he suggested would be a long battle against Islamic extremism.

"I'm inclined to believe it's important and necessary to do," Mr. Bush said. He said this was an "accurate reflection that this ideological war we're in is going to last for a while, and that we're going to need a military that's capable of being able to sustain our efforts and help us achieve peace."

Speaking in an interview with The Washington Post, Mr. Bush did not specify how large an increase he was contemplating or put a dollar figure on the cost. He said that he had asked his new defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, to bring him a proposal, and that the budget he unveils at the beginning of February would seek approval for the plan from Congress, where many members of both parties have been urging an increase in the military's size.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Congress authorized a 30,000-soldier increase in the active-duty Army after the Sept. 11 attacks — when the Army stood at about 484,000 — in what was described as a temporary measure. Army officials say they hope to reach that authorized total troop strength of 514,000 by next year and would like to make that a permanent floor, not a ceiling.

To that end, the Army already has drawn up proposals to grow to up to 540,000, with some retired officers advocating an even larger increase.

<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/20/world/middleeast/20sistani.html> December 20, 2006 Top Iraqi Shiite Cleric Is Inching Toward a Coalition By KIRK SEMPLE and EDWARD WONG

BAGHDAD, Dec. 19 —Iraq's most venerated Shiite cleric has tentatively approved an American-backed coalition of Shiite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish parties that aims to isolate extremists, particularly the powerful Shiite militia leader Moktada al-Sadr, Iraqi and Western officials say.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

American officials have been told by intermediaries that Ayatollah Sistani "has blessed the idea of forming a moderate front," according to a senior American official. "We wouldn't have gotten this far without his support."

-- Yoshie <http://montages.blogspot.com/> <http://mrzine.org> <http://monthlyreview.org/>



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list