This commentary appeared in Washington Post on May 28, 2004.
Friday, May 28, 2004; Page A23 With all the disastrous news coming out
of Iraq, increasing numbers of Americans are starting to believe the United
States is doomed to failure and must soon get out. According to the Pew
Research Center, 42 percent of Americans now favor bringing U.S. troops
home, up from just over 30 percent at the start of the year. Leading elected
officials, and not only opponents of the war, are starting to sound the
alarm, as has Sen. Lincoln Chafee, that the United States may be headed
for a strategic defeat.
On the right, retired Lt. Gen. William Odom argues that the occupation
is already a "failure" and that it is time to withdraw the troops.
On the left, former Clinton deputy national security adviser James Steinberg
and analyst Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution believe the
United States should set a date for departure sometime next year and stay
thereafter only if specifically asked by a new Iraqi government. Centrists
such as Leslie Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations,
suggest that the United States should acquiesce in a three-way division
of Iraq among the Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites.
Some critics, such as retired Gen. Anthony Zinni, argue that insufficient
planning, inadequate resources and poor execution have doomed the enterprise.
Others feel that the task of turning Iraq into a functioning democracy
was always beyond the capacity of the United States.
Reaching the goal of a stable, unified and non-threatening Iraq does
look increasingly difficult, but the consequences of abandoning even that
minimalist objective could be severe. Leaving Iraq under the pressure
of terrorist attacks would be viewed as a strategic defeat of historic
proportions for the United States. The message sent around the world would
be that enough roadside bombs, suicide attacks and beheadings of civilians
can succeed in forcing the United States (and by extension, any government)
to abandon its goals. Success in driving out the American superpower would
go down in terrorist lore as a great "victory," inspiring new
campaigns on new battle fronts all around the world.
Withdrawal under the current circumstances would also entail the very
significant risk -- if not probability -- of turning Iraq into a failed
state. The departure of U.S. troops would create a security vacuum that
would quickly be filled by the most heavily armed and violent groups in
Iraqi ethnic, religious and linguistic communities would probably struggle
to establish control over that country's vast energy riches. Civil war,
ethnic cleansing and genocide on a scale exceeding the breakup of Yugoslavia
would be a likely result. Iraq's neighbors -- including Iran, Syria, Saudi
Arabia and Turkey -- would probably be drawn in, supplying arms and money
to their preferred factions and perhaps even intervening directly. The
great irony is that the United
States would be left with a new Afghanistan -- a haven for terrorists
-- even as it continued to work to stabilize the old one.
While the Bush administration has pledged to stay the course, it has
already made several major course corrections, accelerating the return
of sovereignty to Iraqis and expanding the role of the United Nations.
On June 30 Iraq will cease to be an occupied enemy and become an ally
and partner. As Secretary of State Colin Powell has made clear, American
troops will then remain at the sufferance of the Iraqis.
If it is to retain that sufferance or, more accurately, if it is to regain
it, the United States will need to make adjustments in its military strategy
commensurate with the changes it has introduced in its political and diplomatic
approaches. Henceforth, American forces cannot afford to destroy villages
to save them. They cannot afford to use artillery, gunships and ordnance
from fixed-wing aircraft in populated areas, regardless of the provocation.
They cannot afford to sacrifice innocent Iraqi civilians to reduce American
casualties. They cannot afford to sweep up, incarcerate and hold for months
thousands of Iraqis -- many of them innocent -- to apprehend a smaller
number of guilty ones. They cannot afford to use pain, privation or humiliation
to secure information.
Whether such actions are consistent with the laws of armed conflict is
not the relevant criterion. What matters most is that such actions are
inconsistent with the treatment of an allied population upon whose sufferance
and support this mission depends.
The objective of insurgent tactics is to show that coalition forces cannot
protect the civil population while simultaneously provoking responses
that will drive up civilian "collateral damage." Our forces
cannot entirely escape this dilemma, but they can demonstrate greater
sensitivity for Iraqi civilian casualties, first by beginning to keep
track of how many innocents are indeed being killed and wounded by insurgent
or coalition actions, and then by adjusting tactics and rules of engagement
to reduce the figure. American spokesmen in Iraq might talk less about
offensive operations to win the war on terrorism and more about protective
measures to improve security for the Iraqi public. Emergency and long-term
medical attention for civilian victims can be improved and highlighted.
Coalition commanders can defer to Iraqi authorities when considering operations
likely to produce high collateral damage, and explore the possibilities
for local accommodation with tribal, communal and religious elements.
An insurgency cannot be defeated without the support of the population.
The United States will not secure that support unless it puts public security
at the center of its military strategy. Strong presidential leadership
will be required to effect such a fundamental shift in that strategy.
In the absence of such a shift, early withdrawal may be the only alternative,
with all the consequences that could ensue.
James Dobbins is director of the International Security and Defense
Policy Center at the Rand Corp. Philip H. Gordon is a senior fellow in
foreign policy studies at the Brookings Institution.
Explore All Topics »