(from Harvard Commencement, 2005 - the entire address is worth a read)
http://www.harvardmagazine.com/commencement/05pbk-deutch.htmlexcerpt
. . .
This leaves the question of what should be done today. There is a widespread view that we have a responsibility to stay in Iraq until certain minimum conditions are achieved: some degree of security for the Iraqi people, a reasonable start on stable and representative self-government, and partial reconstruction of the civilian infrastructure. Any thought of prompt withdrawal is considered unthinkable by most Republicans and Democrats, because it difficult to envision an early withdrawal that leaves a peaceful Iraq in its wake. A withdrawal followed by a violent collapse of the nascent Iraqi regime would signal failure of our Iraqi policy and possibly invite further unrest in the region. So the expectation is that the United States will be in Iraq for several years, perhaps in a somewhat reduced presence, spending considerable money and lives, working to achieve the minimum objectives mentioned above.
The reasonableness of this approach depends on a judgment on how much progress is being made on achieving the conditions required for withdrawal. However, there are two additional important factors to consider: first, how much are United States’ interests in the region and the Arab world generally being harmed by our continued presence in Iraq, and second, how much does the United States presence in Iraq reduce our ability to deal with other important security challenges, notably North Korea, Iran, and combating international terrorism? Those who argue that we should “stay the course” and believe that early withdrawal will affect our credibility in the region must consider the possibility that the United States will fail in its objectives in Iraq and suffer even worse loss of credibility at the time of a later withdrawal. I believe that we are not making progress on our key objectives in Iraq. There may be days when security seems somewhat improved and when the Iraqi government appear to be functioning better, but the underlying destabilizing forces of a robust insurgency and warring factions supported by outside governments is undiminished.
So my judgment is that the United States should withdraw from Iraq as soon as possible, say by the end of the year. In January, Senator Edward M. Kennedy suggested five measures that I believe are a sensible start to achieving a successful withdrawal: (1) Progressive political disengagement by the United States with Iraqi’s making more of their own decisions; (2) Adoption of a clear exit strategy and a timetable for withdrawal; (3) Beginning to withdraw military forces; (4) conducting regional diplomacy with Iraq’s neighbors and the Arab league to discourage external intervention in Iraq; and (5) Continued training of Iraqi security forces.
Such measures cannot guarantee a secure and democratic Iraq free of external domination. But they are first steps toward adopting a posture that will permit the United States to pursue successfully its long-term interests in the Middle East and the Persian Gulf.
John Quincy Adams, a former Harvard Phi Beta Kappa orator said it well in 1821:
“Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her
heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. …The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force. ... She might become the dictatress of the world: she would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit.”
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
