Another Term for "Cut and Run"?

Today, Thomas Friedman suggests that if we let the Iraqis know that we will be handing sovereignty over to some form of interim government at the end of June, that we expect democratic elections to be held a year later, and that we will then leave, that by some miracle all of the disparate factions will suddenly cooperate to form a viable national government. As the basis for this assertion, he points to a tentative agreement between Hamas and what's left of the Palestinian Authority in Gaza, in relation to how Gaza might be governed in the event that Israel actually does withdraw its soldiers and illegal settlements from that tiny territory.

Whatever the merit of the observation that the remnants of the P.A. are willing to negotiate with Hamas to prevent a civil war, and to ensure the flow of international aid, in the event of an Israeli withdrawal, the situation in Iraq is a bit more complicated. Ignoring the fact that the Bush Administration apparently doesn't want to leave, and is building massive infrastructure to support tens of thousands of American troops for the indefinite future, the calculus is very different for the various factions in Iraq. The Kurds have expressed a willingness to join a national government as long as they get self-rule - something close to a state of their own, but not so close as to make Turkey uncomfortable. And they have suggested that they will try to form an independent state if that's not possible. But there's little to inspire those who benefited from a Sunni-led dictatorship, or those who desire a Shiite theocracy, to stick with a plan which will lead to a relatively secular and pluralistic democracy.

I am sure that Friedman believes that this approach - throwing the baby into the deep end and letting it learn how to swim on its own - would work. It's not the nuttiest idea he has espoused in his column over the last few years. But it is reminiscent of the suggestion that we "cut and run" - or follow the Vietnam model of declaring "victory with honor" and leaving a puppet government to fend for itself. While some puppet governments have managed to last for quite a few years after the departure of their sponsors, most don't seem so lucky. It takes somebody like Friedman to point to the possibiliity that a peace agreement might theoretically hold between two factions in a tiny territory where a long-standing occupation might theoretically be ended, and to argue that it proves, well, anything.

Comments