'Exit strategy' -- Immanuel Wallerstein

[bemildred]

The debate has shifted in the United States. It is no longer about the merits of the US invasion of Iraq. It is now about when and how the US can withdraw its troops from Iraq, what is called "exit strategy". US President George W Bush does continue to make speeches before ultra-friendly audiences saying that withdrawal now would embolden terrorists. But I think one should notice the "now" in his rhetoric.

---

One has to pay attention when the quintessential establishment voice on foreign policy in the US, the review Foreign Affairs, runs an article in which the author is arguing that "the Bush doctrine has collapsed" and that consequently the government has no choice but to "embrace realism" and take a "pragmatic turn". And despite repeated statements by various people that the US troops may stay until 2009 or longer, Major General Douglas Lute, who is the director of operations of the US Central Command -- which oversees the occupation of Iraq -- has now stated on the record that the US will pull "significant numbers of troops out of Iraq in the next 12 months in spite of the continuing violence".

---

Further to the left, there is a number of groups now calling for immediate withdrawal. Their march on Washington was a clear success, with between 100,000 and 200,000 participants -- not yet up to the anti-Vietnam War numbers, but then in this war, there are no middle-class draftees. Most of the soldiers are lower-class minorities and poor Whites. The latest polls show a three-way split in US public opinion: one-third for total and immediate withdrawal; one-third wanting to reduce the number of troops, but not yet ready for total withdrawal; and one-third to "stay the course", as President Bush phrases it, or to stay in Iraq "until the job is done," as Vice-President Cheney puts it. This seems to mean a very long time. Those more in the political centre want withdrawal by a fixed date. The Observer in London wrote recently that the British government is planning to withdraw substantial troops next spring. This was immediately denied by Tony Blair, but the Observer is not known for inventing stories.

---

The answer by those in favour of immediate withdrawal is quite simple. They argue that order has already broken down in Iraq, that the US continued presence is one of the principal causes of this breakdown, that every additional day spent there worsens the situation rather than improves it. And finally they argue that a fixed future date provides no magic since the likelihood that the situation will be substantially different on that date from today is minimal.

Al Ahram

[kenny blankenship]

1. And (they might have added)

a partial withdrawal makes it easier for the insurgency to target troops left behind.

We're in or we're out.