FAILURE? HOPE & THE IRAQI "SURGE"

PRELIMINARIES

The Congressional Hearings during the past few days, and now the developing 'pro and con' testimonies of many thoughtful and not so thoughtful partisans, will start to feed unbiased and biased information into the 'content' of the  basic policy question.  : "To get out of the Mess or continue with the Mess in hopes that it will stop being a Mess? THAT is the policy question."

After listening and trying to understand the real nature of the dilemma, I concluded that I had better get some solid information to help me to start my own deliberative process, GIVEN the NEW information provided by both General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker in the past few days. I must start this discussion by honestly suggesting that I heard very little that was new and EMPIRICALLY and SUBSTANTIVELY useful (to me). Some of what I did hear and did not hear nearly offended me :

>> (1) The over-defense of the efficacy of the military surge based on our so-called "improved" position in Anbar Province,

>> (2) To me, the overuse of the notion that a most solid indicator of future 'success' was likely to occur because of the 'PEACE' developing in Anbar Province and thus many Sunnis fighting with us to defeat the al Qaeda as a MAJOR reason why we should 'stay the course', and

>> (3) Far too little mention of the 'political and government of Iraq accomplishments (and/or deficiencies) and their impact on long-term prospects for unification, federalism, or separation of Iraq into separate nations.

So? I hit the researchable sources on the Internet and got some quick insights. I had to try to 'feel' the nature of the problem 'on the ground' and in the (unknown to me) military and government centers. I try, when I deal with a problem, to do some "what if I was there and involved and was either on my real side or on the 'other' side!" simulating You know, get out of your own skin and be the 'enemy' or the 'unbiased or biased key negotiator'. Seek out OBJECTIVITY! This helps to neutralize dysfunctional 'mind-sets' that one usually owns and by which one is thus unwittingly burdened.


AN ANBAR PROVINCE PRIMER


First a few facts about Anbar Province from WIKIPEDIA and from sources I have heard about from Hard Copy, Radio,  and TV:

"Al Anbar (Arabic: اÙ?Ø£Ù?بار; al-’AnbÄ?r) is a governorate of Iraq. The largest province in Iraq by area, it has one of the lowest population densities in Iraq and shares borders with Syria, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. Al Anbar is overwhelmingly Sunni Muslim Arab. Its capital is Ar Ramadi."

From other sources: The Sunnis (Saddam Hussein's lineage) in Anbar represent about five percent of the 'normal' population of Iraq. There may be more residents therein because of the relocation of many Sunnis from Baghdad because of the violence in the capital during the past five years. Since the population of Iraq was and still possibly is about twenty-five million persons, that would suggest that there are approximately 1.25 million persons in Anbar at the present time (there has been significant out-migration that can only be guessed about). Tribal affiliations are presumably very important there. Their leaders and affiliated groups provide protection and can help to provide whatever work opportunities there may be to ease the burdens of citizens who have tried to live in this war torn country, Iraq,  over the past half decade.

There are reports that suggest that al Qaeda participants have moved into the Province and that they are strong and growing. The natural antipathy between the Sunnis and al Qaeda, if that is true, possibly arise from the extremist religious positions of al Qaeda (and the Taliban) and the far more moderate positions of the Sunnis especially relating to Islamic secular and Shari'a Law.

The successes within the Anbar Province seem to have had more to do with the plans and actions of the local Iraqis, rather  than the USA forces (there really is little logic of including commentary about the nearly non-existent COALITION). Why is Petraeus using this 'good news' to defend the non-removal of USA troops and literally heaping success suggestions upon a USA effort that is hardly deserved, as the emerging facts SEEM TO BE INDICATING?

THE Al QAEDA-IRAQ ISSUE  (the AQI)

One could argue that the USA "pre-emptive" invasion of Iraq produced an intent by the extremists (al Qaeda and the Taliban) to stand against the Sunnis and the USA forces now in Iraq, and that the 'wide open spaces of Anbar provide a good place for confrontations to take place. The orientation of Anbar geographically makes it rather easy to attract dissidents from surrounding other Muslim nations to support the LONG-TERM prospects for success against USA forces in Iraq. Indeed, Senator Biden's strong opinion is that there may be a temporary (certainly not full) quieting down, perhaps due to the USA ON-SITE SURGE, but that violence will continue and escalate after this temporary pause that now seems to be developing. In short, Anbar says nothing abut the LONG-RUN prospects for a secure PEACE in the whole of Iraq or more particularly, Anbar.

Some very important research is now starting to appear relating to the strength of al Qaeda. In a recent article sent to me by a good friend of mine, there is this quote:

"How big, then, is AQI? The most persuasive estimate I've heard comes from Malcolm Nance, the author of The Terrorists of Iraq and a twenty-year intelligence veteran and Arabic speaker who has worked with military and intelligence units tracking al-Qaeda inside Iraq. He believes AQI includes about 850 full-time fighters, comprising 2 percent to 5 percent of the Sunni insurgency. "Al-Qaeda in Iraq," according to Nance, "is a microscopic terrorist organization." Are there substantial numbers of al Qaeda 'troops' in Anbar?

What is the "TRUTH"? I certainly do not know! Do our military intelligence groups in the Army, Marine Corps, Air Forces know such facts? Why isn't our government telling us? WE THE PEOPLE need to know the FACTS. MANY OF US ( I include myself here) THINK THAT WE ARE DELIBERATELY BEING HELD IN THE DARK! Is that so? What is OUR present democracy all about? Can I TRUST our leaders?

WE THE PEOPLE pay the bills with personal anguish, money, and our children's lives on the line -- ours and Iraqis. WE have a right to know the TRUTH! Each of their lives is as precious as any 'leader's' life.There seems to me to be a powerful sense of UBIQUITOUS MISTRUST in the body-politic here at home. I, for one, am certainly dismayed and my dismay is beginning to hinge on near significant disrespect for 'leadership'.

There is this following fragment from an article that gives hope, but does  it a basis for LONG-TERM prospect of sustainability, or a 'yesterday's and today's guess about the probable future?

"A recent New York Times article describes Anbar as, "undergoing a surprising transformation. Violence is ebbing in many areas, shops and schools are reopening, police forces are growing and the insurgency appears to be in retreat." [4] "Yet for all the indications of a heartening turnaround in Anbar, the situation, as it appeared during more than a week spent with American troops in Ramadi and Falluja in early April, is at best uneasy and fragile."

BASIC POLICIES AND THE SEEMING FAILURES OF THE PRESENT IRAQ GOVERNMENT

Why was so little (in public hearings) said about the noted failures of the present Iraqi government to deliver on their promises to get important legislation and start-up implementation started during the past year? I personally found Ambassador Crocker's commentary very uninformative and literally useless in gaining perspective about what was going well and what was going poorly. YET it is the POLITICAL solution that is identified as the  KEY to the decision to 'stay or not stay' in Iraq.

The fundamental premise of the original Congressional decision by the USA to try the 'surge's" tactical -- not strategic -- intent (I never thought of the surge as strategically useful at all) was the noted likelihood that the 'surge' would invigorate the Iraqi Government to move to take hold of their own destinies, and give our USA a chance to moderate our involvement. Now it is becoming more clear that the Iraqi Government officials, as presently constituted, want to 'stay in power' with the MILITARY (and FINANCIAL?) support of the USA to keep the present regime in control. Here, I hope I am wrong! But I must admit to my own skepticism! It parallels another disturbing thought : That of our own Congress on the Republican side.

Is personal ambition of USA and Iraqi officials alike 'shaping' attitudes toward the future of Iraq? Is HOPE being fostered in the USA precisely to enable our Republicans to possibly have a greater probability of being re-elected? Is the same thought being promulgated in the minds and hearts of the Iraqi officials? Is the thought "Keep the USA in Iraq in order to avoid having to deal with insurmountable problems relating to early blissful thoughts about UNIFICATION and PROSPECTS to serve in an emerging New and Prosperous Democratic Nation"? The Iraqi officials understand the deep facts about of both their critically important religious issues and their secular concerns, and know that TIME is needed to REALLY end up with a viable governmental organizational design for their loved country. The general pervasive atitude among persons I know is that the government there as presently constituted will never work out well. Ambassador Crockr was almost totally silent on the point, and seemed always to be defending an unlikely possibility relating to Unification, secular needs, and Federalism.

Our USA congressional officials, REPUBLICAN Representatives and Senators confront  similar prospects about being cast out of office. They live with a dilemma too. When in the past I have read that in private they are against present policies, and yet espouse publically that they are in favor of the President's role and present policies, I wince. Is that official LYING, or FEAR, or just plain HEINOUS when we lay in the fact that week by week, month by month, year by year, half-decade by half-decade, YOUNG LIVES and SIGNIFICANT TREASURE (that could have been used for advanced citizen educations, human health, environment improvement, and improved lives, etc., etc.) have been denied our own people by a pre-emptive war OF CHOICE that seems (to me) to have been nearly meaningless, as measured by either wise opinion or the measured accomplishment of 'the GOOD'!