By the way, has anyone heard from Wolfowitz?

by Pat Buchanan
Is America's War Winding Up?
Sunday, July 31, 2005 06:56:17 AM

Is America preparing to pull out of Iraq without victory? Are we ready
to leave that war-ravaged land without any assurance a free,
democratic, pro-Western Iraq will survive? Is President Bush willing to
settle for less than we all thought?

So it would seem. For it is difficult to draw any other conclusion from
the just-completed Rumsfeld mission.

Standing beside our defense secretary in Baghdad, Prime Minister
Ibrahim al Jaafari called for the speedy withdrawal of U.S. forces. The
top U.S. commander, Gen. George Casey, also standing beside Rumsfeld,
said "fairly substantial" withdrawals of the 135,000 U.S. troops in
Iraq could begin by spring.

This seems astonishing, when hawkish critics of Bush are saying we need
more, not fewer U.S. troops, if we hope to win this war.

What is going on? "The struggle against the Iraqi insurgency has passed
a crucial tipping point," writes UPI's senior news analyst Martin
Sieff.

Casey's comment lends credence to a secret British defense memo that
described U.S. officials as favoring a "relatively bold reduction in
force numbers." The memo pointed to a drawdown of Allied forces from
170,000 today to 66,000 by next summer, a cut of over 60 percent.

Previously, the administration had denounced war critics who spoke of
timetables, arguing that they signal the enemy to go to earth, build
its strength and strike weakened U.S. forces during the pullout.

Now, America's top general is talking timetables.

Jaafari set two conditions for a rapid U.S. withdrawal: faster training
of Iraq security forces and coordinated transfer of duties for
defending the cities to the Iraq army. These conditions would seem
easily met by the United States.

Among growing signs of American impatience with the situation in Iraq
is Rumsfeld's tough talk to Baghdad to complete the writing of its
constitution by Aug. 15. "We don't want any delays," he said. "Now's
the time to get on with it." In October, Iraq is to vote on that
constitution, and on December on a new government.

The reasons for America's impatience are understandable. First, the
poll numbers are turning against the war, with half the American people
now believing the United States will not win it.

Second, two years into a guerrilla war, the Iraqis, whose fathers and
brothers fought Iran to a standstill in an eight-year bloodbath in the
1980s, still cannot cope with an insurgency of 20,000 to 30,000 enemy.
Or not enough are willing to fight.

Third, while Gen. Casey says the level of enemy attacks "has not
increased substantially over the past year," their lethality has
increased, especially the suicide car-bombings.

"Insurgencies need to progress to survive," said Casey. But it is also
true the guerrilla wins if he does not lose, and the Iraqi insurgents
are not yet losing. And if 135,000 U.S. troops cannot, after killing
and capturing tens of thousands, crush a guerrilla movement, how can
the Iraqi security forces, heavily infiltrated, succeed where we
failed?

Fourth, the new Iraqi constitution is reportedly not going to track the
work of Madison and Hamilton, and women look like the big losers. If
the new Iraq resembles Iran, Americans are unlikely to support having
sons and daughters dying to defend such a regime, elected or not.

Then there is the budding Baghdad-Tehran axis. Neither Condi Rice nor
Rumsfeld nor any U.S. official has been invited to visit the Grand
Ayatollah Sistani. Yet, Iran's foreign minister was invited to visit
that Shia pope, and Jaafari and eight Cabinet ministers paid a return
visit to Iran. There, Jaafari apologized for the Iraq-Iran war and laid
a wreath at the tomb of the Ayatollah Khomeini, who first branded us
"the Great Satan."

U.S. forces in Iraq are thus today fighting in defense of a
Shia-dominated regime that sees its future in close collaboration with
an "axis-of-evil" nation Bush has declared a state sponsor of terror.

While Jaafari backed away from an earlier agreement to have Iran train
Iraqi troops, we can begin to see the shape of things to come.

Sunni terrorists and foreign fighters have begun to target Shia clerics
and mosques. And the Shia have begun to retaliate with counter-terror,
portending a religious-civil war when U.S. troops depart. Kurds are
demanding that their virtual independence be enshrined in the new
constitution. Or they veto it.

Should civil war break out as Americans depart, Iran would move to fill
the gap with weaponry and perhaps volunteers to assist their Shia
brethren in keeping Iraq in friendly hands. A Sunni-Shia war in Iraq,
with Iran aiding one side and Arab nations the other, becomes a real
possibility.

No wonder the Pentagon sounds impatient to get out. By the way, has
anyone heard from Wolfowitz?

To find out more about Patrick Buchanan, and read features by other
Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators
Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2005 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

.

Relevant Pages