Leaving Iraq
Nov 25th, 2006 at 8:51 am by Susie
Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska) in today’s WashPo:
There will be no victory or defeat for the United States in Iraq. These terms do not reflect the reality of what is going to happen there. The future of Iraq was always going to be determined by the Iraqis — not the Americans.
Iraq is not a prize to be won or lost. It is part of the ongoing global struggle against instability, brutality, intolerance, extremism and terrorism. There will be no military victory or military solution for Iraq. Former secretary of state Henry Kissinger made this point last weekend.
The time for more U.S. troops in Iraq has passed. We do not have more troops to send and, even if we did, they would not bring a resolution to Iraq. Militaries are built to fight and win wars, not bind together failing nations. We are once again learning a very hard lesson in foreign affairs: America cannot impose a democracy on any nation — regardless of our noble purpose.
We have misunderstood, misread, misplanned and mismanaged our honorable intentions in Iraq with an arrogant self-delusion reminiscent of Vietnam. Honorable intentions are not policies and plans. Iraq belongs to the 25 million Iraqis who live there. They will decide their fate and form of government.
It may take many years before there is a cohesive political center in Iraq. America’s options on this point have always been limited. There will be a new center of gravity in the Middle East that will include Iraq. That process began over the past few days with the Syrians and Iraqis restoring diplomatic relations after 20 years of having no formal communication. The next installment would be this weekend’s unprecedented meeting in Iran of the presidents of Iran, Syria and Iraq, if it takes place.
What does this tell us? It tells us that regional powers will fill regional vacuums, and they will move to work in their own self-interest — without the United States. This is the most encouraging set of actions for the Middle East in years. The Middle East is more combustible today than ever before, and until we are able to lead a renewal of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, mindless destruction and slaughter will continue in Lebanon, Israel and across the Middle East.
Hegel gets it: talking about victory & defeat is inappropriate.
The military contest was over long ago. We won.
The post-victory operation is just about over too and that, on the other hand, was a miserable and costly failure. It was botched from the git go and is clearly beyond recovery.
Talking in terms of victory & defeat is the losers’ game–a way of framing the discussion to make it sound like we somehow have to stay. Don’t accept that frame.
3 years, hundreds of thousands dead, more maimed, and finally someone remembers what our founders took for granted: that governments derive their powers from the consent of the governed.
We never will be able to impose a government the Iraqis don’t want and have it work out.
We are such slow learners.
Vis-a-vis Sen. Hagel’s OpEd piece in the Washington Post:
I find it bordering on the sublimely ridiculous that Sen. Hagel, or any other elected politician, or political operative, has the gall to imply anything but U.S. responsibility for a situation entirely of our manufacture.
“Iraq is not a prize to be won or lost.
Excuse me?
Iraq was nothing BUT a prize to be won, until it became clear we had no idea what to with it once we had it!
“It is part of the ongoing global struggle against instability, brutality, intolerance, extremism and terrorism.â€
What?
Iraq became a CENTER of instability, brutality, intolerance, extremism and terrorism, since shortly AFTER our escapade began.
“There will be no military victory or military solution for Iraq. Former secretary of state Henry Kissinger made this point last weekend.â€
Oh, my.
Dr. Kissinger, he of the “secret plans,†says no military solution or victory is possible in Iraq? Where was he four years ago, playing RISK® with James Schlesinger?
In regard to the author’s slip of the pen, I’m not surprised.
It seems our intentions – honorable or not – were never written down anywhere in the first place, or perhaps they were deleted before anyone with a sense of history could read them.
Solecism notwithstanding, there have been far more than the four “mis-es†mentioned in the article.
It left out
• mistaken use of intelligence
• misappropriation of funds
• miscalculation of cause and effect
• misled American public
• misbegotten premise
• misguided religious sanctimony
• miscarriage of justice
• misinformed decision making
• misanthropic outlook
• missed opportunities
Okay, so I threw the last one in.
I sure hope you don’t misread MY intentions.
For more information about my intentions, please come see me at
http://www,statecraftinformer.com