By Brigitte L. Nacos
If news
reports are correct, the administration and congress are willing to take
another look at the Iraq Study Group’s Report that was praised, when released
in December, but ignored by decision-makers in the White House. It would be
good news for a change. Perhaps the scheduled talks of American officials with Syria and Iran on finding cooperative ways to pacify Iraq are the first signs that the bi-partisan Iraq Study Group has belatedly some
impact on actual policies concerning Iraq and the Middle East. Different approaches
along the lines of the Iraq Study Group are long overdue. The old strategy including
the so-called surge in troop deployment has not improved the situation in Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq; instead, every single day has
witnessed more lethal attacks on coalition soldiers, Iraqi civilians, and Iraqi
security forces. As the Washington
Post reports today, “Military deaths have been rising since last fall, and
the first half of this year has already been deadlier than any six-month period
since the war began more than four years ago. According to iCasualties.org, 531 U.S. service members have been killed since Dec. 1, an average of more than three
deaths a day, while 3,422 have died since the war began in March 2003.”
According to the Iraq Coalition Casualty
count, the total number of fatalities among coalition forces and Iraqi security
forces and civilians is much higher. Given this dismal picture, one can only
hope that former Congressman Lee
Hamilton, who along with former Secretary of State James Baker chaired the
bi-partisan Iraq Study Group, is right, when he said recently, "They
[administration officials] are coming our way.” For Democrats and Republicans
in Congress getting behind a bill in favor of an Iraq policy based on the Study
Group’s specific proposals would be a good move—although far from guaranteeing
acceptance by the president and his team.
When Gordon Brown replaces Tony Blair as British prime
minister and withdraws British troops within three months or so from Iraq,
there are no longer “coalition forces” to speak of in Iraq—only American
forces. Unless Washington decides on comprehensive new approaches, it is impossible to imagine a change
for the better—regardless what Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Mitch Romney, and
other hawkish Republican candidates for the presidency suggest on the campaign
trail.
When the Iraq Study Group issued its report, the first of its 79 recommendations stated,“The United States, working with the Iraqi government, should launch the comprehensive New Diplomatic Offensive to deal with the problem of Iraq and the region. This new diplomatic offensive should be launched before December 31, 2006.” Unfortunately, the White House rejected this recommendation until very recently. At this point, one can only hope that administration officials are serious in trying to find common ground during the scheduled talks with Iraq’s neighbors. If so, that should be the beginning of new policy approaches with respect to Iraq and the region.
Comments