Does Obama See the U.S. as Long-Term Guarantor of Iraqi Stability? If So, For How Long -- And Why?
Also in World
Does Obama's Road to Re-Election Run Through Kabul?
Christian Parenti
Obama Accepts Nobel Peace Prize With a Pro-War Speech
Norman Solomon
Obama Far Outdoes Bush in Escalating War -- The Numbers Will Surprise You
David DeGraw
Is Erik Prince Threatening the U.S. Government?
Jeremy Scahill
At Least 127 Dead in Baghdad Bombings
Over 1,000 Delegates for Peace Will Mark 1st Anniversary of Gaza Invasion, Protest Ongoing Israeli Siege
Medea Benjamin
Equally important, Obama needs to enunciate his policy for Iraq. As described earlier, Iraq is a seething mix of militias and "pissed off Iraqis." Does Obama see the United States as long-term guarantor of Iraqi stability? If so, for how long? And why? What if violence escalates among Iraq's volatile mix of political enemies and factions? What if that violence again takes the form of sectarian-based civil war, or if Iraqi Arabs and Kurds clash over Kirkuk and Mosul? In fact, renewed violence in Iraq is more likely than not. If it erupts, especially as U.S. forces are leaving, Obama will face accusations from neoconservatives, Republicans, and the media that he is squandering the gains supposedly accomplished during the Bush-Gates "surge." So be it. If that's the political price he has to pay, then he must pay it. But it would minimize the damage if he articulated, now, the view that the surge did not solve Iraq's political divisions and that, perhaps, Iraqis might end up settling their differences by force as America gets out.
Of course, there is a great deal that Obama can do to reduce the severity of the coming score-settling in Iraq. He should go to the United Nations to get its help on negotiating a national reconciliation strategy among Iraqis, with a high profile, non-American special envoy in the lead. He can launch a diplomatic surge among Iraq's neighbors, including Iran, to persuade them to use their influence to rein in their agents, allies, and pawns inside Iraq. (For that, the United States is going to have to pay a price: Iran will want U.S. concessions in exchange for helping to stabilize Iraq. Saudi Arabia will want the United States to adopt something like King Abdullah's 2002 Arab peace plan for Palestine. Turkey will want American political and financial support for its agreement to allow somewhat more Kurdish autonomy than it would otherwise like. And Syria, which has influence over Baathist and Arab nationalist forces in Iraq, will want U.S. support for its efforts to reclaim the Golan Heights and for the United States to acknowledge its legitimate interests in Lebanon.)
There's more: lots of U.S. money for rebuilding Iraq. A promise not to seek bases for U.S. forces. A willingness to allow Russia, China, Japan, and Europe equal access to Iraqi oil contracts and reconstruction efforts.
The wild card, of course, is Iran. I'll deal with Iran, and its influence in Iraq, in Part V of this series, on Saturday.
This is the third in a series of posts on Barack Obama's Middle East dilemmas.
See more stories tagged with: iraq, barack obama, george w. bush, surge, david petraeus, ray odierno, awakening, mike mullen
Robert Dreyfuss is the author of "Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam" (Henry Holt/Metropolitan Books).
Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from World! Sign up now »
You've chosen to turn comments off for the entire site. Would you like to turn them back on?
Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.