Friday, June 11, 2004
America Continues Its Retreat in Iraq
Today's news brings two and one-half items that betray our continuing retirement. First, in Najaf the Sadrists made a major attack against a police station, killing Iraqis, and later burned eight cars. This spells the end of the latest peace agreement, even though there is some doubt that these particular Sadrists are under the control of Muqtada al-Sadr. The Americans took no part and did not move to intervene. The local government chief said that he didn't want the Americans to come in, the police would handle it (would that they would). Now the Falluja approach seems institutionalized here also, again without Americans and certainly without peace. Taking the position that anything is better than having the Americans fighting in Najaf, as Professor Juan Cole would assert, this is just what we should be doing.
On the Kurdish front, the Kurds are looking for the United States to intervene, the Kurds feel deeply that they have been betrayed by the Americans when they failed to get the provisional constitution enshrined in the U.N. resolution. Larry Diamond, the democracy expert who has recently returned from a stint in Iraq, says that the Americans must work hard to forge an agreement between the Shiites and the Kurds that both sides can agree to. Otherwise, the country goes up in flames and in the flames will be many of the liberal, secular principles that we fought so hard to put in the provisional constitution. However, the Times reports that American officials "reject the idea that American diplomats should try to mediate a solution to Iraqi federalism. . . . Rather the United States [has] created a situation where the Kurds will have to negotiate their future with supporters of Ayatollah Sistani, and seek their own accommodations." In effect, they are washing their hands of the problem, doing exactly what the Kurds accuse them of doing. "It's their problem now".
On the infrastructure front, it has been admitted that the faceless enemy has set destruction of electrical power grid as one of its top priorities. Although much has been rebuilt, the rate of attacks has recently increased. The U.S. contractor remarks that his firm has been putting in lots of alternate lines, so that the system is getting more robust all the time. Each break now makes less of a difference. He says he has been asked to develop quick reaction teams that can locate and repair breaks more quickly. Again we note that the U.S. army seems strangely quiet. The occupation authority is not concentrating on actually defending the system, but rather on the use of contractors to rebuild it faster than it can be destroyed. This approach may be cost effective, but psychologically it represents another form of pull back.
Today's news brings two and one-half items that betray our continuing retirement. First, in Najaf the Sadrists made a major attack against a police station, killing Iraqis, and later burned eight cars. This spells the end of the latest peace agreement, even though there is some doubt that these particular Sadrists are under the control of Muqtada al-Sadr. The Americans took no part and did not move to intervene. The local government chief said that he didn't want the Americans to come in, the police would handle it (would that they would). Now the Falluja approach seems institutionalized here also, again without Americans and certainly without peace. Taking the position that anything is better than having the Americans fighting in Najaf, as Professor Juan Cole would assert, this is just what we should be doing.
On the Kurdish front, the Kurds are looking for the United States to intervene, the Kurds feel deeply that they have been betrayed by the Americans when they failed to get the provisional constitution enshrined in the U.N. resolution. Larry Diamond, the democracy expert who has recently returned from a stint in Iraq, says that the Americans must work hard to forge an agreement between the Shiites and the Kurds that both sides can agree to. Otherwise, the country goes up in flames and in the flames will be many of the liberal, secular principles that we fought so hard to put in the provisional constitution. However, the Times reports that American officials "reject the idea that American diplomats should try to mediate a solution to Iraqi federalism. . . . Rather the United States [has] created a situation where the Kurds will have to negotiate their future with supporters of Ayatollah Sistani, and seek their own accommodations." In effect, they are washing their hands of the problem, doing exactly what the Kurds accuse them of doing. "It's their problem now".
On the infrastructure front, it has been admitted that the faceless enemy has set destruction of electrical power grid as one of its top priorities. Although much has been rebuilt, the rate of attacks has recently increased. The U.S. contractor remarks that his firm has been putting in lots of alternate lines, so that the system is getting more robust all the time. Each break now makes less of a difference. He says he has been asked to develop quick reaction teams that can locate and repair breaks more quickly. Again we note that the U.S. army seems strangely quiet. The occupation authority is not concentrating on actually defending the system, but rather on the use of contractors to rebuild it faster than it can be destroyed. This approach may be cost effective, but psychologically it represents another form of pull back.
Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
