home > by publication type > daily analysis > Going Long in Iraq
Email
| Author: |
|---|
Analysts wonder whether a long-term U.S. presence in Iraq will overshadow the development of Iraqi troops. (AP Images/Karim Kadim)
Blunt pronouncements of a long-term U.S. presence in Iraq, once a highly sensitive subject, are now commonplace. Some Iraqi officials say they envision U.S. troops in their country for “a considerable amount of time” (AP), while others are calling for an extended security agreement (TIME) with the United States. In Washington, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates told the Senate Appropriations Committee on September 26 that he also predicts a long-term presence in Iraq. Gates, who has scored a quiet victory (Newsweek.com) in the debate over troop withdrawals, says up to five combat brigades (NYT) could remain in Iraq for years to “go after al-Qaeda in Iraq and help the Iraqi forces.”
The pronouncement is not universal. Democrats in Congress continue to push for withdrawal; House lawmakers on October 2 vowed to stall President Bush’s $190 billion war funding request unless it is linked to a redeployment plan (Reuters). Yet some presidential candidates are already talking as if a lasting—although slimmed-down—presence in Iraq is a foregone conclusion. During a presidential debate in New Hampshire last month, none of the top three Democrats would promise a full-scale military withdrawal by 2013 if elected. Only Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) and New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson offered withdrawal timelines (Newshour). “The key question” is no longer whether the United States will remain militarily involved in Iraq, says the Washington Post, “but what size, mission, and length” the next administration’s build-up will be.
Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, likely contributed to acknowledgement of a longer time horizon on Iraq. While he faced sharp questioning and skepticism in the Senate last month, the general’s message that the “surge” is working appears to have bought President Bush time to pursue his war strategy, while quashing Democrats’ hopes of an immediate pullout. CFR Senior Fellow Charles A. Kupchan, a National Security Council official in the Clinton administration, says there’s another, less political reason for the shift: “a palpable fear” that pullout could lead to genocide and regional instability (SFChron).
A protracted presence in Iraq would come with a high price tag. The Congressional Budget Office concludes that a Korea-like model (PDF), employing fifty-five thousand troops in Iraq—well below the current 160,000—would cost taxpayers $25 billion annually. A non-combat scenario would lower annual costs by about $10 billion. The scenario includes roughly ten thousand trainers working to develop the Iraqi security forces.
Regardless of the model and the availability of funding, training of Iraqi soldiers will likely continue, military experts say. Since 2005 coalition forces have embedded with Iraqi military and police units to assist in logistics and mission planning. Col. David Abramowitz, chief of staff for the Iraq Assistance Group, which oversees the training program, tells CFR.org that assisting Iraqi forces will become increasingly important when U.S. troops eventually leave. Others, including some U.S. commanders that lead training in Iraq, say an even more aggressive training regime is needed to build up Iraqi fighters. They say a strong Iraqi security presence (McClatchy) is the key to victory in Iraq—politics aside.
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.
Copyright 2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.