That was quick. Last night I read that Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, along with Kurdish and Sunni leaders had reached an agreement on key benchmarks. In short, there appeared to be movement on the politics so vital to ending the civil war in Iraq. Although there was immediate skepticism in the foreign press, it was too soon to tell last night whether this was something substantive, or whether it would fall by the way side like it has so many times in the past in Iraq. The way it looked last night, Bush was going to try to claim victory for the surge by pointing out this agreement. I figured we would know in the coming months if it was real. Boy was I wrong in how long it would take to assess it. The deal is already on life support less than 24 hours later.
Maliki has already been in trouble for a long time. But Sunday's dishonest display just highlights how little credibility he has. This is how Reuters called it yesterday:
Iraq's leaders agree on key benchmarksIraq's top Shi'ite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish political leaders announced on Sunday they had reached consensus on some key measures seen as vital to fostering national reconciliation.
...
Iraqi officials said the five leaders had agreed on draft legislation that would ease curbs on former members of Saddam Hussein's Baath party joining the civil service and military.
Consensus was also reached on a law governing provincial powers as well as setting up a mechanism to release some detainees held without charge, a key demand of Sunni Arabs since the majority being held are Sunnis.
...
Yasin Majid, a media adviser to Maliki, told Reuters the leaders also endorsed a draft oil law, which has already been agreed by the cabinet but has not yet gone to parliament.
Despite being very pessmistic about the situation in Iraq, my first instinct was to hope that this was real, and that the different factions could reach agreement and end the civil war. For the sake of the Iraqi people, I can't help but hope that their lives will improve after so many years of suffering. I also am in the camp that firmly believes that there is no military solution in Iraq, only a political one. I would rather be wrong in my pessimism than have the Iraqis live in fear of death for one more day. Predictably, President Bush seized the agreement and heaped praise:
"These leaders... recognise the true and meaningful reconciliation that needs to take place," Mr Bush said....
"Yesterday's agreement reflects their [Iraqi leaders'] commitment to work together for the benefit of all Iraqis to further the process," Mr Bush said in a brief statement in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Describing the accord as "an important step", he said he had told Iraqi leaders that "much more needs to be done".
It seemed that this is where the discussion would end. At least until after General Petraeus's report was given. We wouldn't know if it was a substantive agreement until after Bush used it to make our troops stay longer. Seeing that this is Iraq, trying to predict what will happen next is futile unless you decide to be a pessmist and predict things will get worse. Which it did, less than 24 hours after Maliki's appearance on TV:
Sunnis cool on Iraq political dealSunni Arab politicians refused to end their boycott of Iraq's Shiite-led government on Monday despite a broadbrush deal aimed at bridging the country's bitter sectarian divide.
...Leaders of Iraq's rival Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish sects squeezed out the agreement after lengthy talks on Sunday, but leading Sunni Arab politicians said it failed to meet all their demands.
...
"The Front will not return to the government unless all its demands are met," said Khalaf al-Alayan, a leading politician and lawmaker from the bloc which quit the government on August 1.
"The government is trying to show to the world that it is working, but it is a failure and has to go. It does not have credibility."
Alayan said Hashemi had joined the other four leaders in announcing the latest political move in his capacity as a "vice president and not as leader of the Front."
Even Omar Abdul Sattar, a leader of Hashemi's Iraqi Islamic Party, dismissed the agreement as stage-managed. "It was an irrelevant media production," Abdul Sattar told AFP.
Iraqi political leaders have in the past announced broadbrush agreements but have battled to implement them or hammer out specifics.
To be clear, I don't give a lot of credence to one individual sect, but considering the fact that this "agreement" was trumpeted when the leaders' own members in the parliament had no intention of supporting it nor ending their boycott is very telling of the deteriorating political situation in Iraq. It also shows that we cannot trust Iraqi politicians in the Green Zone. This incident magnifies moreso than any other piece of evidence what a complete failure the surge has been. Securing a few neighborhoods in Baghdad will not bring the factions together. Because of the fact that we went into this war on a premise that turned out not to be true and the fact that the post-war period was botched so completely, there are no good options left, only least bad options. I firmly believe that we must set a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, as it guarantees that no more troops will die for a feckless Iraqi government unwilling to make compromises to end the civil war. It also is our last hope, that coupled with intense diplomacy, the Iraqi factions will stop playing these games and finally get to work in creating their own country.
This is the deadline the White House set for itself, and it has failed.
Stick a fork in it.
What makes anyone think Iraqis (or anyone else) will do exactly as we demand? They will do what they will do for their own reasons and on their own schedule. The objectives of the United States (i.e., to get the hands of the mega Western energy companies on eighty percent of Iraq's oil, leaving a smidgen for the Iraqis to control themselves) is the major stumbling block to any so-called political settlement, and no matter how Maliki tries to dress up this rape, it simply will never be approved by any other Iraqi group, tribe, or interest group.
The Iraqi government charade currently in place is not ready for prime time, so quit trying to take this show on the road. Get out while the getting is good, the original window of opportunity was wasted. Short of a massive, draft-infused surge on the order of tens of thousands upon thousands, we cannot impose our will, and, given the rising interest and power of Russia, Iran, and a desperate Muslim world in general, I doubt that we could get away with any such mannoth surge at this late date.
In other words, we do not have the luxury of a choice, and blaming the Iraqis for our feckless situation is absurd. The trick is to get our tail out with as much preserved of our armed forces, prestige, and international influence as possible, while preventing everything from degenerating into a general regional war. We need to be represented by Tallyrand (France's astute and clever diplomat at the Congress of Vienna aftrer Napoleon's defeat). Not by dumb, dumber, and dumbest whose fanciful idiot ideals of remaking the Middle East are in no way a guide to realistic negotiations.
There is no "country" to create as Iraq only exists on maps drawn out by the Brits. War lords and Imams, that is what rules the Arabs. That is not going to change.
Unless, we can find someone to replace Sadam. What WILL unify Iraq is a totalitarian dictator. I hear that Noreiaga is available or, what has been in the wings for quite some time, Ahmed Chalabi.
But, in September, watch how fast the Democrats give BushCo another FU (Friedman Unit, not the FU they deserve).
Leave NOW. Do not look back. Nothing is going to change. We are not protecting anything at this point other than Haliburton contracts.
Thanks beachmom.