Escaping the Quagm... Um, Long Hard Slog

The London Guardian today offers eight diverse viewpoints on how the U.S. (um, I mean, "the coalition") can move forward in Iraq. While I encourage you to read the whole presentation, here are some quotes:

"The historian - Paul Kennedy"

One wishes that the term "exit strategy" was not bandied about at all. Although the conservatives deny the comparison, it has deep echoes of Vietnam. Exit strategies from a conflict, such as Napoleon's retreat from Moscow or the British army heading towards Dunkirk, are often desperate, hand-to-mouth affairs, and full of Clausewitzian frictions. They smell of defeat, and defeatism. Most importantly, the open discussion by one side of various ways of making an exit gives a tremendous morale and propaganda boost to the opposition - all they have to do now is to hang on until the terminus date itself, and sharpen their knives.

"The negotiator - David Owen"

Sadly, the Democrats look as if they will campaign against the war in Iraq but, one hopes, majority opinion will stay firm. They know Iraq is already a far better place following the removal of Saddam. Second, Bush is the first US president to recognise that we have all been far too complacent about the Middle East's undemocratic Arab governments. Third, Bush believes - and I think he is right - that we will not obtain peace in the Middle East unless there is a democratic Palestinian state to take its rightful place alongside Israel. Success for the US and UK policies in Iraq will produce major reforms in the Middle East and create the climate for an Israeli-Palestinian settlement. If the US and UK fail in Iraq it will further destabilise a Middle East where Saudi Arabia is looking very vulnerable and do immense harm to the cause of peace in Palestine and in Israel.

"The Iraqi - Mustafa Alrawi"

[T]he coalition has been hampered by its own mistakes. First, the disbandment of the army; second, the policy of de-Ba'athification; and third, above all, the creation of the governing council (GC). This unrepresentative, power-hungry and reactionary body has done a great deal to hold back political progress in Iraq.

"The Washington insider - James Rubin"

With conditions in Iraq deteriorating, there are three fundamental decisions that need to be made. First, what kind of role should the international community play? Second, what is the right force mix needed to defeat the growing insurgency? And third, how quickly should sovereignty return to a provisional Iraqi government?

"The Iraq expert - Said Aburish"

To correct the developing disaster in Iraq, we must replace the people on both sides who are responsible for it. The Iraqi peoples' growing nostalgia for Saddam is the strongest indication that the wrong Americans and Iraqis are running the show. My leading candidate for the chop is Dr Ahmad Chalabi, the American-appointed head of the governing council.

"The soldier - Tim Garden"

In Iraq, the scale of the security forces has been significantly greater than in Afghanistan. While the situation is not yet satisfactory, local despots cannot yet rule their areas unhindered. What is lacking is the sense of direction towards a new democratic Iraq. The Iraqi governing council is widely seen as an ineffectual creature of the US. While prudence means that the US has tried to include representatives of significant factions, they lack universal legitimacy. Now the US is set to hand power over to this council next July without fussing about a constitution or an election first.

"The defence expert - Dan Plesch"

The myth is that Iraqis need to be educated in democracy. The reality is that since the League of Nations mandate Iraqis have been allowed to take part in fake democracies, first to support a British-backed regime and then to elect Saddam's sham parliament. Elections were held repeatedly under Saddam. In many parts of Iraq, locally initiated elections have already taken place and provide the momentum for the election of a new government.

"The dissenter - Clare Short"

What we should do now in Iraq is what we should have done in the first place. Even after the rush to war and the deceit that went into it, it would have been possible to organise the reconstruction with international legitimacy and cooperation.

Comments