It’s difficult to find anyone these days that doesn’t think a civil war exists in Iraq. Sure, there’s some Al-Qaeda elements in the Sunni community, but from the accounts I’ve read, it accounts for less than 10% (and probably closer to 5%) of the current violence.
From Army General David H. Petraeus, U.S. Commander in Iraq (March 9, 2007):
Ultimately, he said, the solution in Iraq would have to be a political one.
“Any student of history recognizes that there is no military solution to a problem like that in Iraq,” he said. “Military action is necessary to help improve security … but it is not sufficient.”
A “surge†doesn’t provide a political solution. Immediate troop withdrawal doesn’t provide a political solution.
But this idea does. From today’s Washington Post:
The central unresolved questions in Iraq are: Who rules, and how? The heart of the problem is the Shiite-Sunni competition for power: Shiite parties see no reason to give up the gains they made after the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime, and they believe it is their turn to govern; the Sunnis cannot reconcile themselves to the fact that they no longer dominate the Iraqi state. Trust between the two is at a low ebb, and each side feels an existential threat that makes compromise difficult.
The United States must focus above all on an Iraqi compact. In 1995, after a war that left hundreds of thousands dead, a frustrated international community finally decided that the parties to the conflict in Bosnia had to be brought to the negotiating table. The Serbs, Croats and Bosnians were pressed to convene in Dayton and pressured by other nations to stay at it. The Dayton Accords were ratified by the key parties and overseen by the international community, and they have kept the peace in Bosnia.
A Dayton-like process for Iraq would be a multi-tiered international engagement. At its heart would be an Iraqi national compact forged by Iraqis with international and regional endorsement. The process would require certain indispensable elements.
First, there must be a strong and credible driving force behind the process; the United States is best placed to be that driving force but need not be alone in this task. Second, the process must have a credible sponsor, such as the United Nations, and high-profile, skilled facilitators. Third, the single objective must be producing a Sunni-Shiite agreement as the cornerstone of the national compact. Fourth, Iraqi groups must be represented at the highest decision-making level. Fifth, the discussions and negotiations should be sustained until the necessary compromises have been made and agreements reached. Sixth, mechanisms for implementing the agreement have to be spelled out — with a timetable.
Finally, concerned countries, including Iraq’s neighbors, must ratify this accord and agree to respect it. Once a national compact has been reached, it should be linked to other regional and international mechanisms and accords, such as the International Compact for Iraq, with its system of benchmarks, achievements, and Iraqi and international obligations.
Now this makes sense!
More News and Commentary for Moderates
â€â€™Moderate’ is not a 4-letter word.â€