Bush and Maliki
November 29, 2006; Page A18 President Bush is in Jordan today for meetings with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and the most important message the two leaders could send would be to reaffirm their common commitment to their antiterror fight. That task has clearly been complicated by recent events -- including more blood in Baghdad and the Republican wipeout in Congress caused in part by frustration with the Iraq war. There's also this week's spectacle of the wannabe Walter Cronkites at outlets like NBC News and the Los Angeles Times patting themselves on the back for declaring that the Iraq conflict is a "civil war." Mr. Cronkite is often credited with helping turn public opinion against the war in Vietnam, and today's media point seems to be to declare the war unwinnable, as if this were actually desirable. To his credit, Mr. Bush refused to give ground to such defeatist rhetoric during meetings with NATO leaders yesterday. No doubt many critics will continue to snicker at his alleged lack of realism, but public confidence is crucial to avoiding disaster in Iraq. We're clearly at a hinge point in Iraq, with Mr. Bush himself saying there's a need for "fresh eyes" and James Baker's Iraq Study Group poised to report next month. Among the policy options being considered are redoubled military efforts against the insurgents and diplomatic outreach to Syria and Iran. But even supporters of reaching out to those regimes must realize that U.S. negotiating leverage will be zero if they sense the U.S. is ready to cut and run. As for the talks with Mr. Maliki, let's hope Mr. Bush resists the pressure he will face from some Arab leaders (and his own State Department) to push Mr. Maliki to make concessions to Baathist and Sunni Islamist insurgents. Such tactics have been tried a number of times in recent years, with no discernible reduction in the insurgency. That failure in turn has fed suspicions among the majority Shiites that the U.S. would secretly prefer that Iraq be led by a new Sunni strongman. Jordan's King Abdullah didn't help matters recently by hosting Harith al-Dari of the Sunni Association of Muslim Scholars -- a terrorist front group -- only days ahead of the Bush-Maliki summit. One reassuring sign is that the President fingered Sunni extremists as the root cause of the violence during his press conference yesterday in Estonia: "There's a lot of sectarian violence taking place -- fomented, in my opinion, because of the attacks by al Qaeda causing people to seek reprisal." The point here is to define who the main enemy in Iraq continues to be, and that is the Baathist and al Qaeda insurgents. They are the source of the car bombs that continue to go off in Shiite neighborhoods and that have inspired Shiite reprisals. The undearly departed Musab al-Zarqawi's explicit strategy was to fan such sectarian attacks precisely so the Americans would lose patience and leave. Mr. Maliki will, in turn, have a far easier time building political support for disarming Shiite militias such as the Mahdi Army once Sunni bombs stop killing Shiites. Mr. Maliki reportedly wants more control over the Iraqi Army and better weaponry to tackle Sunni insurgents, and we hope Mr. Bush listens to what the Prime Minister has to say. Which brings us back to the alleged "civil war." The term seems to have acquired a totemic meaning in Iraq, although the U.S. has intervened successfully in civil wars before: the Balkans and Afghanistan, most recently. Regarding Iraq, the goal of the "civil war" chorus seems to be to delegitimize the war by painting what is a false picture of the balance of power and legitimacy between the Iraqi government and the terrorists. The sectarian violence is a horrible problem. But by any reasonable definition, a "civil war" implies at least two militarily strong factions with a popular claim on political leadership. Neither of those conditions exists in Iraq. The country's elected, pan-sectarian government and its several hundred thousand security forces remain the only legitimate power center. The Sunni insurgents, meanwhile, are a mix of Islamists and Baathists who enjoy little support and are capable only of terrorist-style attacks. They hold sway only through murder and intimidation in areas where the government lacks enough troops to assure public safety. Shiite militia leaders are also divided and what support they enjoy is due to the perception among ordinary Shiites that the government has been unable to protect them. Few Shiites would be eager to see Moqtada al-Sadr, the radical cleric, in Mr. Maliki's chair. The next Iraqi or American official to be asked about "civil war" might want to reply by asking the journalist who, precisely, is fighting whom, and why Iraqi security officers of all backgrounds continue to risk their lives for the elected Baghdad government. The truth is that the enemies of Mr. Maliki's government are terrorists and thugs. Mr. Bush could help give Mr. Maliki the confidence he needs for the tough fight ahead -- first against the Sunni terrorists, then against the Shiite revenge killers -- by assuring him that U.S. policy will be based on this fact. | 
No comments:
Post a Comment