Why does this page look this way?
It appears that you are using either an older, classic Web browser or a hand-held device that allows you to view our content but may not work with every feature of our site. If you are using an older browser, please upgrade for the best experience.
Navigation
home > by publication type > daily analysis > Which Way Forward on Iraq?
| Prepared by: | Lionel Beehner |
|---|
The Iraq Study Group calls for a changing of the guard. (DOD)
The calm after the storm set off by the Iraq Study Group (ISG) report has settled in, leaving the question of what happens next. While nobody expects President Bush to adopt the ISG report wholesale—particularly its recommendations to pull out combat troops by 2008 or to engage Iran and Syria (NYT)—he has indicated some change in course can be expected. The White House says it will weigh the ISG report along with forthcoming reports coming from the Pentagon, State Department, and National Security Council before making any major changes in policy. This new Backgrounder addresses these proposals competing for the president’s attention.
The ISG report has stirred debate in foreign policy circles. Some say it is a recipe for failure in Iraq. Instead of regional diplomacy or fewer combat troops, what is needed is more "energy and competence in fighting the fight" (WSJ), suggests Eliot A. Cohen of Johns Hopkins University. Others say the report is overly generous to Iraqi neighbors like Saudi Arabia, which indicated it may back Iraq's Sunnis in the event of a U.S. pullout. "Saudi Arabia is the elephant in the room that cannot be mentioned," writes Greg Palast in the Guardian. Roger Cohen, writing in the New York Times, says the problem with the report is it "treats Iraq as an existing country needing a quick fix in the name of resurgent American realism, rather than a still-to-be-born country that needs to be ushered into being in the name of American idealism."
The ISG is critical of the U.S. approach to Iraq. But it says Iraqi leaders “who are not working toward a united Iraq” also share responsibility. This “begins to pave the way for a U.S move out of Iraq in a way that if push comes to shove would attempt to place the lion’s share of the burden on Iraq,” CFR President Richard N. Haass tells Bernard Gwertzman. The ISG report endorses a withdrawal of U.S. support if the Iraqis do not make political progress. Yet the logic of this approach is faulty, say experts like CFR President Emeritus Leslie Gelb, because if the Iraqis meet the milestones set, Washington can also expect to withdraw its support. This raises questions about what incentives there are for Iraqis to reform.
All of the plans are expected to call for a political solution to resolve the violence in Iraq. But history, as CFR Fellow Stephen Biddle explains in this Backgrounder, suggests that negotiated settlements are rare in civil wars. More often than not, national reconciliation emerges after one side is defeated on the battlefield. There is a growing sense that Iraq’s various sectarian divisions cannot be healed through political compromise. Shiite leaders who hold true sway over Iraqis are not in the government. They include the popular clerics Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani and Moqtada al-Sadr, or the head of the largest Shiite faction, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, who met recently (RFE/RL) with Bush in the Oval Office.
Some, including British Prime Minister Tony Blair, suggest focusing less on Iraq’s internal politics and more on the regional dimension. Bring in Iraq’s neighbors, they say, including Iran and Syria, to hold an international conference that addresses not only Iraq but also the Arab-Israeli peace process. After all, this precedent has a sound track record in places like Madrid (where Arab-Israeli peace talks reconvened in October 1991), Dayton (where agreement was reached in 1995 to resolve the Bosnian War), and Bonn (where the aftermath of the war in Afghanistan was brokered in 2001). Writing in the American Interest, Michael E. O’Hanlon of the Brookings Institution lays out the positives for a Bosnia-style option. But as former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Richard C. Holbrooke points out, Washington’s only leverage in Iraq is the threat to pull out, whereas in Bosnia it had the threat to bomb them. “It’s quite a different kind of thing,” he says.
There are also growing calls for a drawdown of U.S. forces, perhaps by as early as 2008. President Bush has rejected calls for a “graceful exit,” but said more recently he needed to be "flexible and realistic" (PBS) about troop deployments. The ISG suggests switching the military mission from combat to support by embedding up to 20,000 advisory officers with the Iraqi forces. But CFR’s Biddle says there are real risks with this strategy. “If any significant fraction of U.S. troops is pulled off the streets, the situation will get worse,” he writes.
Then there is the question of what defeat in Iraq would mean for U.S. interests, not to mention America's standing in the world. Haass writes in TIME that regardless of the outcome, the United States will remain the world's lone superpower. "What is essential," he says, "is that the U.S. cut its losses there, contain the consequences and look for new opportunities to advance its interests around the world. The sooner the post-Iraq era of U.S. foreign policy dawns, the better."
Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
To order Task Force reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or order online from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1.800.537.5487, fax +1.410.516.6998.
For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1.212.434.9516 or email publications@cfr.org.
Start-Up Nation addresses the trillion-dollar question: How is it that Israel—a country of 7.1 million, only sixty years old, surrounded by enemies— produces more start-up companies than large, peaceful, and stable nations like Japan, China, India, Korea, Canada, and the UK? With the insights of geopolitical experts and investors, the authors examine this nation’s adversity-driven culture to answer this question and offer prescriptions for a global economy on the rebound.
In Forces of Fortune, Vali Nasr presents a paradigm-changing revelation that will transform the understanding of the Muslim world at large. He reveals that there is a vital but unseen rising force in the Islamic world—a new business-minded middle class—that is building a vibrant new Muslim world economy and that holds the key to winning the cold war against Iran and extremists.
In Cuba: What Everyone Needs to Know, Julia E. Sweig presents a remarkably accessible portrait of Cuba's unique place on the world stage over the past fifty years, including its internal politics, its often fraught relationship with the United States, and its shifting relationship with the global community.
Complete list of CFR Books
The report of this bipartisan Task Force of distinguished leaders and experts represents a strong consensus on the importance of repairing America's immigration policy. It makes the case that maintaining America's political and economic leadership depends on attracting talented and hard-working immigrants, and on securing the country's borders in a smart, effective, and humane way.
This report finds that nuclear weapons will remain a fundamental element of U.S. national security in the near term, and makes recommendations on how to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. deterrent nuclear force, prevent nuclear terrorism, and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime.
About Independent Task Forces at CFR
Complete list of Task Force reports
Identifying international threats and acting on them may be the most difficult job for U.S. policymakers. This report
provides an actionable road map for managing international threats before they erupt into crises and makes a strong case that preventive action is not a luxury but a necessity.
For more than a decade, the United States has mostly watched from the sidelines as Asian countries organize themselves into an alphabet soup of new multilateral groups. In this report, the authors review the relationship between pan-Asian and trans-Pacific institutions and suggest policy guidelines for a new U.S. approach to this new Asian landscape.
Complete list of Council Special Reports
To request permission to reprint or reuse CFR material, please fill out this permissions request form (PDF), referring to the instructions on page 1.
Browse Content By Region IssuePublication TypeThe Think TankFor The MediaFor Educators About CFR
Copyright 2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.
