Let's talk about Barack's plan to turn the page in Iraq. What do you think distinguishes Barack's approach on Iraq from the rest of the field?
Barack Obama moves us away, again and again, from the false dichotomies that pervade our politics. In the Iraq debate right now it often feels as if you have, on one side, the President and his supporters who are in total denial about what's happening on the ground. They claim that this catastrophic war can all be turned around by US troops, and they warn of the calamitous consequences of withdrawing – sectarian violence against civilians, heightened Iranian influence, an al Qaeda foothold, without ever so much as acknowledging that these are the present realities in Iraq, precipitated by the US invasion and occupation. But on the other side of the political divide at home, we hear from those who support withdrawal that US forces are the source of all of Iraq's problems, with the implication that that once we get out the mess will clean itself up, or, even if it doesn’t sort itself, its not our problem. The debate seems to lunge between denialism on the one side and indifference to consequences on the other.
Obama is busting out of this false dichotomy, and saying, responsibly, “look, we need to begin withdrawing immediately, we were totally wrong to go in, but instead of simply asserting there won’t be any strategic or humanitarian consequences to our exit, let's begin right now to do all we can to mitigate those consequences.” Closing our eyes and ears and suspending thought about withdrawal until it occurs isn't smart or humane, so can we begin to do consequence mitigation now? That means planning a counter-terrorism residual force, bringing in international partners, using what leverage we have in Iraq and in the region to ensure minorities are less vulnerable when we leave, talking to our foes to try to neutralize their negative influence, helping neighboring countries shoulder the mounting burden of this war, etc..
This plan reflects Barack's ability to take responsibility for difficult challenges -- to not wish away complications but embrace them and try to resolve things as best he can. I think it reflects, on a micro and macro level, his longstanding belief that none of the essential transnational problems that exist on the horizon—counter-terrorism, non- proliferation, you name it—can be solved by military force alone. He recognizes that we need a surge in political action, a surge in diplomacy within Iraq when it comes to bringing the Sunni on board, and it isn’t US troops who should be responsible for that surge in diplomacy. For too long we have asked the US military to bear the burden of stabilizing Iraq. They have done what has been asked of them, but it is long past time to acknowledge that Iraq’s stabilization hangs not on the US military’s performance but on Iraqi political compromise. However unlikely that compromise seems at present, the only way to increase the odds of it happening is to use all the tools in the American toolbox – diplomatic, political, and economic.
How will Barack work with other countries to help stabilize Iraq?
Obama's is the first plan that actually is willing to provide tangible resources to Iraq's neighbors, which have themselves suffered the spillover of Iraq. His plan recognizes that we can't just snap our fingers and expect regional powers to run to the table and offer help to the United States or to Iraqi stability —that we've got to incentivize their cooperation. These people are deeply nervous about what the influx of Iraqi refugees is going to mean in their countries. His plan says, 'Look we recognize that we invaded this country. Iraq’s neighbors, you are the countries dealing with the humanitarian consequences of our invasion. You are the ones facing two million refugees pouring into your borders, and we are going to help you.'
He understands that the humanitarian dimension of Iraq – which the Bush administration hasn't dealt with at all -- is fundamentally a strategic dimension, a national security dimension. Barack knows that we need to get beyond the false dichotomy between our interests and our values. The refugees are a moral problem but they are also a strategic problem. That fragile sectarian demographic balance in the region is something that will implicate US interests for generations to come. And we're not going to get support from Iraq's neighbors if they don't feel like they're getting support from us in grappling with the colossal domestic challenge of managing the arrival of two million Iraqis.
More at:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post_group/ObamaHQ/CWg5#extended
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
