It increasingly looks like critics of the Bush administration who were called cynical and overly partisan may be able to say “I told you so” on the “surge” of U.S. troops into Iraq when a highly awaited report is delivered in September.
When the idea for the surge surfaced, some argued that when Gen. David H. Petraeus gave his highly-awaited progress report on the “surge” come September it would be a “given” that the surge had succeeded, or was at least headed towards success. The war’s staunchest critics, on the other hand, argued that when September rolled around the word would probably be that more time was needed…that the troops would have to stay over there longer than many hope or that perhaps even more boots on the ground would be needed.
Now, once again in the ever-controversial history of the Iraq war, it appears once again that the people who outlined the worst case scenario that assumed the original administration plans were either a)overly optimistic or b)a kind of way to buy time to keep the war going longer than admitted in public….may turn out to be correct (or to at least appear to be correct). The Washington Post blog:
Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, said he does not expect the “surge” of 30,000 additional troops to Iraq to finish their job by September, a critical month when lawmakers expect a clear read on whether the larger troop presence is having an effect.
“Fox News” Host Chris Wallace asked Petraeus, “You surely don’t think the job would be done by the surge by September?”
“I do not, no,” Petraeus replied. “We have a lot of heavy lifting to do. The damage done by the sectarian violence in the fall and winter of 2006 and early 2007 … was substantial.”
Petraeus also did not dispute reports indicating he might want to extend the troop increase into next year, simply calling them “premature.”Petraeus and his partner, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan C. Crocker, appeared on the Sunday talk shows as the final troops arrived as part of the surge strategy, which looks to quell violence in Baghdad and the surrounding regions as Iraqi politicians seek political compromises.
In a sense, though, Petraeus report will raise eyebrows no matter what he says:
–If he says there’s progress some will dismiss it as mere spin.
–If he says they need to stay over longer, some will say the “surge has failed.”
But the key problem remains the incredible — and increasing — hubris of the Bush administration which has begun to match the hubris of the Lyndon Johnson administration in terms of official pronouncements versus reports about the war (which you’ll find in great quantities in most newspapers and on most TV and cable networks, except for Fox News which has greatly decreased its war coverage). Due to its credibility problems on a host of issues, the Bush administration’s pronouncements are increasingly taken by many Americans with a grain of salt. And by some with all the salt in the Dead Sea.
Indeed, those arguing for a draw down of U.S. troops and/or an exit are being told in no uncertain terms that it’s not going to happen:
Speaking on Fox News, General David Petraeus said there was broad recognition in Washington that Iraq’s daunting challenges would not be resolved ‘in a year or even two years.’
‘In fact, typically, I think historically, counter-insurgency operations have gone at least nine or 10 years,’ he said.
President George W. Bush and other US officials have taken to invoking South Korea as an example of a protracted US presence in a country long after formal hostilities have ended.
But in Congress, Democrats agitating for an early withdrawal of US forces have fastened on Petraeus’s appraisal report due in September as a make-or-break moment for Bush’s war campaign.
A Pentagon report last week said that overall levels of violence in Iraq have not gone down, even if unrest has eased in Baghdad and the long-restive province of Anbar, where the US military surge is focussed.
The outlook: continued partisan struggle over the war, Republicans seeking re-election facing tough choices in 2008 as official determination to stay in Iraq a while runs counter to shrinking poll-measured support for the war, pressure on Democrats to do more to end the war than their procedural efforts so far, pressures from the Democratic base for party elites to take a stronger anti-war line and the continuation of White House isolation from politicians of both parties who seek any kind of political future.
But until a new President is in office, the shots about a continued presence in Iraq are called by the Bush White House, unless the Democrats have the votes and will to cut off war funding. And neither exist yet. So expect polarization and controversy over the war to grow.
And September? Today’s news reports suggest it won’t be a benchmark month but just another month of controversy that will continue to build heading into 2008. The war most assuredly will be a huge issue in the 2008 Presidential campaign.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.