Zbigniew Brzezinski: How to End the War

[DeepModem Mom]

WP, op-ed: How to End the War
By Zbigniew Brzezinski
Sunday, March 30, 2008; B03

Both Democratic presidential candidates agree that the United States should end its combat mission in Iraq within 12 to 16 months of their inauguration. The Republican candidate has spoken of continuing the war, even for a hundred years, until "victory." The core issue of this campaign is thus a basic disagreement over the merits of the war and the benefits and costs of continuing it.... (I write, of course, as a Democrat; while I prefer Sen. Barack Obama, I speak here for myself.)...

***

Terminating U.S. combat operations will take more than a military decision. It will require arrangements with Iraqi leaders for a continued, residual U.S. capacity to provide emergency assistance in the event of an external threat (e.g., from Iran); it will also mean finding ways to provide continued U.S. support for the Iraqi armed forces as they cope with the remnants of al-Qaeda in Iraq.

The decision to militarily disengage will also have to be accompanied by political and regional initiatives designed to guard against potential risks. We should fully discuss our decisions with Iraqi leaders, including those not residing in Baghdad's Green Zone, and we should hold talks on regional stability with all of Iraq's neighbors, including Iran.

Contrary to Republican claims that our departure will mean calamity, a sensibly conducted disengagement will actually make Iraq more stable over the long term. The impasse in Shiite-Sunni relations is in large part the sour byproduct of the destructive U.S. occupation, which breeds Iraqi dependency even as it shatters Iraqi society. In this context, so highly reminiscent of the British colonial era, the longer we stay in Iraq, the less incentive various contending groups will have to compromise and the more reason simply to sit back. A serious dialogue with the Iraqi leaders about the forthcoming U.S. disengagement would shake them out of their stupor.

Terminating the U.S. war effort entails some risks, of course, but they are inescapable at this late date. Parts of Iraq are already self-governing, including Kurdistan, part of the Shiite south and some tribal areas in the Sunni center. U.S. military disengagement will accelerate Iraqi competition to more effectively control their territory, which may produce a phase of intensified inter-Iraqi conflicts. But that hazard is the unavoidable consequence of the prolonged U.S. occupation. The longer it lasts, the more difficult will it be for a viable Iraqi state ever to reemerge....

(Zbigniew Brzezinski was national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter. His most recent book is "Second Chance: Three Presidents and the Crisis of American Superpower.")

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/27/AR2008032702405_pf.html

[gateley]

1. Can somebody give me an answer to this --

Here's a snip from Brzezinski's statement:

"The decision to militarily disengage will also have to be accompanied by political and regional initiatives designed to guard against potential risks."

1. This is essentially what the Biden plan called for -- a POLITICAL solution.
2. This passed the Senate TWICE. The first time it was sent back by Bush, the second time BUSH SIGNED IT.
3. WHY THE FUCK HAVEN'T ANY STEPS BEEN MADE TO IMPLEMENT IT?

Additionally, Biden spoke of the need to work with in concert with Iraq and the SURROUNDING nations, which makes all the sense in the world.

We have done NOTHING. What would the situation be now if we had begun this process? And now our little oasis, the Green Zone, is in lockdown.

How have we let this go on?

[dantyrant]

8. Iraqis don't want Biden's plan.

Biden/Gelb plan was a solution catering to domestic(ie US) political expediency, and can only serve to exacerbate sectarian divisions. Will drawing borders around regions make things better? And if so, why aren't all of the provinces secure?

What this plan will do is cement the sectarianism in a political framework that was never meant to be equitable. It's a divide and conquer strategy -- one designed to get all of these different sects to fight each other rather than us. The plan is not meant to create 3 strong autonomous states, but 3 feeble easily dominated failed states. I ask you: what would be better if this plan were implemented? We might feel better about ourselves, but that's not worth much to an Iraqi.

I don't believe we had a right to attack Iraq, and I certainly don't believe we have the right to unilaterally dismantle it.

FWIW, we never left the Balkans after Clinton's illegal NATO action... Do you really think that if we balkanize Iraq that our leaders will pull out the troops? We already have 3 camp Bondsteels under construction.

[gateley]

9. Many of the Iraqis and most of the leadership

do/does support the plan now. This was the Biden/Brownback amendment I'm referring to.

Anyway, you and I won't agree on this approach, but thanks for taking the time to respond. Peace. :hi:

[yurbud]

10. until Democrats deal honestly with what the oil companies hoped to get out of the war...

we won't be able to pry their cold, withered hand from the Iraqis throats.

[elleng]

15. Bush etc WON'T/CAN'T

'work in concert with Iraq and the surrounding nations.' General Clark also advocates this, as a primary part of a workable plan for the region.

And cheney is now talking about addressing Gaza?

[Martin Eden]

2. "residual U.S. capacity ... in the event of an external threat (e.g., from Iran)"

Sorry, but old Zbigniew kinda lost me there.

Why would Iran want to attack their Shiite brethren in Iraq?

And even if there was the possibility of Iran striking some of the minotity elements in Iraq, would it really serve our national intersts to get in a shooting war with Iran?

[krispos42]

3. Station Marines offshore

We spend all this money on amphibious assault ships, guided-missile cruisers, and aircraft carriers. Our 'phibs carry a battalion of Marines with extensive air and sea support. And the 82nd Airborne Division can get there within 24 hours.

[jeanruss]

4. The SPP

He is the main driver to push the USA to combine with Canada and Mexico. I am always wary of what he recommends. He is also the main advisor to Obama. I don't trust this guy.

[balantz]

5. I have serious doubts that either candidate will actually end this war.

[dantyrant]

6. Zbig is no peacemaker.

Let's not forget, he created al Qaeda(Bob Gates had a role to play there too, of course) in order to give the Soviets 'their Vietnam'(his words).

He's also no democrat, however his party affiliation may read.

Lest anyone start to think Ziggy's a respectable mammal, here's some choice excerpts from The Grand Chessboard:

“Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is, defense spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties, even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization." (p.35)

More nuggets of evil:

"Two basic steps are thus required: first, to identify the geostrategically dynamic Eurasian states that have the power to cause a potentially important shift in the international distribution of power and to decipher the central external goals of their respective political elites and the likely consequences of their seeking to attain them;... second, to formulate specific U.S. policies to offset, co-opt, and/or control the above..." (p. 40)

"...To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together." (p.40)

"Henceforth, the United States may have to determine how to cope with regional coalitions that seek to push America out of Eurasia, thereby threatening America's status as a global power." (p.55)

Does this last quote sound like a man who wants to bring the troops home?

[bemildred]

7. Zbig understands that Bush has screwed the pooch and is interested in damage control.

You are right, that doesn't mean he is a nice guy, or an enlightened one either.

[WhiteTara]

11. this is the bastard who helped start sooo much

of this mess when he proxied the war in Afghanistan with Russia. :puke: on him

[defendandprotect]

13. Right --- purposefully done to BAIT the Russians into Afghanistan --- Shameless!!!

PLUS . . . they created the Taliban/AlQaeda with CIA $ via ISI/Palistan . . . !!

Disgusting ---

[defendandprotect]

12. If Americans begin to realize that this war is BANKRUPTING the US . . .

I think there may be a faster --- "tail on fire" --- move out of Iraq --- !!!

[AdHocSolver]

14. My plan to end the Iraq war: hire Iraqis to rebuild their infrastructure. Give them jobs.

If they are working at jobs to rebuild their country, they may stop trying to kill each other.

It is a kind of Marshall Plan for Iraq.

Get Halliburton, Blackwater, KBR, and Dyncorp out of Iraq. We save money and get the pro-war profiteers out.