Back on Oct. 21, when President Obama announced he would withdraw all U.S. forces from Iraq by the end of the year, he reassured the world the U.S. would still stay deeply engaged in Iraq. ”This will be a strong and enduring partnership,” he promised. “With our diplomats and civilian advisers in the lead, we’ll help Iraqis strengthen institutions that are just, representative and accountable. We’ll build new ties of trade and of commerce, culture and education, that unleash the potential of the Iraqi people. We’ll partner with an Iraq that contributes to regional security and peace, just as we insist that other nations respect Iraq’s sovereignty.”
That was then, this is now. Today, the New York Times reports: ”Less than two months after American troops left, the State Department is preparing to slash by as much as half the enormous diplomatic presence it had planned for Iraq, a sharp sign of declining American influence in the country.”
So much for a “strong and enduring partnership” that has “our diplomats and civilian advisers in the lead.” Those of us who argued for a continuing military presence were deeply skeptical the State Department would actually be able to main a mission of some 2,000 diplomatic personnel supported by an army of 15,000 or so contractors. The size of the task they faced was just too huge, and the State Department lacks the resources the military can bring to the task. Sure enough, the U.S. embassy has been having trouble stocking its vast chow hall and getting its personnel outside its fortified walls.
The giant State Department presence we were promised was always a fig leaf covering our shameful abandonment of a country where so many Americans have sacrificed so much. The only surprise is the fig leaf is being yanked away quite so soon to expose the nakedness of the administration’s policy failure.
Please retitle this "Obama failed in Iraq".
You're right in your assessment of what is happening. But this would have been the case whenever we withdrew as there was never any realistic hope of turning the country into whatever it was that Bush hoped. Better to get out now and not waste (yes, waste) any more American lives.
You're wrong. You're letting your emotional Bush-Republican-Conservative hatred rule your intellect. Obama's goal was to get out, not "whatever it was Bush hoped" — so, to take the state of Iraq as it is after 3 years of Obama (consider the increase in American casualties during Obama's years as indicative to his embracing "whatever it was Bush hoped") as evidence that the people's excitement and huge voter turnout, the advances in the energy grid and women's rights and the standard of living for all ethnic groups, and even the admittedly very slow advances made in the police and government security forces were all an illusion and that America (under Bush) encouraging and coercing the various ethnic groups to get along wasn't a better strategy than Obama's, "Hey, we're getting out of here. Go screw yourselves …" is intellectually dishonest. Methinks you hoped things would turn out as Obama caused them so you could blame Bush — but do you really wish that on the people of a whole country?
Yeah, I hate conservatives… despite never having voted for a Democrat. Funny how that works n nI was in favor of the invasion, but only for the purpose of destroying whatever WMDs were there, getting rid of Hussein and then getting out. I never accepted Powell's 'you broke it…" as we didn't break anything, the country was long broken and we had not obligation to have American troops die trying to get the crazies to abandon their lifelong feud to share power and live peacefully among one another. n nAnd the progress you cite was only there as long as American troops were there to enforce the rules. Once we left, whether it was in 2011 or 2021, they were going to go back to what they've been doing for years. Thinking otherwise is arrogance at its best.
Just acknowledging I read your thoughtful reply. We still disagree, but, no, I can't say with certainty that you aren't right. Both Japan and Germany are much different now than they were in the 1930's. Sure, neither of them is Iraq, but the point remains that things do change (always) and more often the changes come closer to what you intend by following through rather than walking away. I also think the world is a much more dangerous place now under Obama than it was under Bush.
I disagree. The world is much safer w/ Obama in charge. We do not have open ended commitments like Iraq anymore. The initial goal of the invasion was not WMD, but making Iraq a stable, prosperous democracy…a shining light in the middle east. How did that turn out? The obama administration is clever to recognize that Iraq is in a sectarian/ethnic crisis. The crisis will play out whether American troops/diplomats are there or not. We should be cutting the embassy by over 75% and giving over the monstrosity of an embassy to the Iraqis to turn into a university. We should ha small embassy in the corner of Baghdad and just watch the action unfold.
We can argue over the details later. Let's split. Time to go home. Until next time.
Max Boot has been to Iraq many times. You should try to make your point without s needless slur to his integrity and courage