Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

ICG Report: After Baker-Hamilton: What to Do in Iraq

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Drops_not_Dope Donating Member (362 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-19-06 03:28 PM
Original message
ICG Report: After Baker-Hamilton: What to Do in Iraq
http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?l=1&id=4580

A new course of action must begin with an honest assessment of where things stand. Hollowed out and fatally weakened, the Iraqi state today is prey to armed militias, sectarian forces and a political class that, by putting short term personal benefit ahead of long term national interests, is complicit in Iraq’s tragic destruction. Not unlike the groups they combat, the forces that dominate the current government thrive on identity politics, communal polarisation, and a cycle of intensifying violence and counter-violence. Increasingly indifferent to the country’s interests, political leaders gradually are becoming warlords. What Iraq desperately needs are national leaders.

As it approaches its fifth year, the conflict also has become both a magnet for deeper regional interference and a source of greater regional instability. Instead of working together toward an outcome they all could live with – a weak but united Iraq that does not present a threat to its neighbours – regional actors are taking measures in anticipation of the outcome they most fear: Iraq’s descent into all-out chaos and fragmentation. By increasing support for some Iraqi actors against others, their actions have all the wisdom of a self-fulfilling prophecy: steps that will accelerate the very process they claim to wish to avoid.

Two consequences follow. The first is that, contrary to the Baker-Hamilton report’s suggestion, the Iraqi government and security forces cannot be treated as privileged allies to be bolstered; they are simply one among many parties to the conflict. The report characterises the government as a “government of national unity” that is “broadly representative of the Iraqi people”: it is nothing of the sort. It also calls for expanding forces that are complicit in the current dirty war and for speeding up the transfer of responsibility to a government that has done nothing to stop it. The only logical conclusion from the report’s own lucid analysis is that the government is not a partner in an effort to stem the violence, nor will strengthening it contribute to Iraq’s stability. This is not a military challenge in which one side needs to be strengthened and another defeated. It is a political challenge in which new consensual understandings need to be reached. The solution is not to change the prime minister or cabinet composition, as some in Washington appear to be contemplating, but to address the entire power structure that was established since the 2003 invasion, and to alter the political environment that determines the cabinet’s actions.

RECOMMENDATIONS

STEPS TO INTERNATIONALISE CONFLICT-RESOLUTION

See Site at Link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-19-06 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
1. Deeply suspicious but willing to listen.
The board of ICG seems legitimate. Their proposal at least appears to make some sense. However I find the last section regarding US policies lame to the point of idiocy.

For example:

"18. Adopt a less aggressive military posture in Iraq by:

(a) redirecting resources to a program of embedding U.S. troops in Iraqi units; and

(b) moving away from fighting the insurgency to focusing on protecting the civilian population, and in particular halting blind sweeps that endanger civilians, antagonise the population and have had limited effect on the insurgency.

19. Redeploy troops along the frontlines of the unfolding civil war, notably by filling in the current security vacuum in Baghdad."

These two points contradict each other.

"27. Publicly deny any intention of establishing long-term military bases or seeking to control Iraq’s oil."

Public denial is not good enough. My trust in my government's word is nil. The bases have to be dismantled, the troops withdrawn, and our involvement in any form in Iraq's oil industy terminated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-19-06 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Soros is on the board
Prepare for full freeper meltdown. This is HUGH!!11!!111!!1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-19-06 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Yes I noticed. Like I said, willing to listen.
indeed if they gain any traction the neothugs will have cranial re-explosions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 02:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC