IRAQ: A PROPOSAL

by RAY FLEMING
AT the beginning of this week President Bush officially dropped the phrase “stay the course” to describe US policy in Iraq. The White House press secretary Tony Snow announced the decision, saying “The President stopped using it. It left the wrong impression about what was going on.” Mr Bush had earlier explained his problem with the phrase: “Stay the course means keep doing what you're doing. My attitude is, don't do what you're doing if it's not working. Change.” Then he added, “Stay the course also means don't leave before the job is done. We're going to get the job done in Iraq. And it's important that we do get the job done in Iraq.” With such woolly-minded leadership it is not surprising that other people are coming forward to propose solutions to the dilemma in which the United States (and Britain) finds itself in Iraq. Yesterday The New York Times ran a long leading article entitled “Trying to Contain the Iraq Disaster”. What follows is a summary of the article, which began with this: “No matter what President Bush says, the question is not whether American can win in Iraq. The only question is whether the United States can extricate itself without leaving behind an unending civil war that will spread more chaos and suffering throughout the Middle East, while spawning terrorism across the globe.” “Americans, Iraqis and the rest of the world need clear, public signs of progress. Mr Bush can make the first one by firing Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
There is no chance of switching strategy as long as he is in contol of the Pentagon. It would also be a signal to the military commanders in the field that the administration now wants to hear the truth about what they need, what can be salvaged out of this mess, and what cannot. The president should also make it clear, once and for all, that the United States will not keep permanent bases in Iraq. “Iraq's prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, has indefinitely postponed reconciliation talks among the nation's top politicians. He must receive an immediate deadline to start the process. The Bush administration must demand not only that new talks start, but that they continue until some agreement is reached on protecting minority rights, dividing up Iraq's oil revenues, the role of religion in the state, providing an amnesty for insurgents willing to put down their weapons, and demobilising and disarming the militias.
Iraqis need a clear demonstration that security and rebuilding is possible. So long as Baghdad is in chaos they will have no reason to believe in anything but sectarian militias and vigilante justice.
In parallel with the reconciliation talks, the United States should begin its own negotiations with the Iraqi leadership about a timetable for withdrawing American troops, making clear that America's willingness to stay longer will depend on the Iraqis' willingness to make real compromises. “When it comes to Iraq the choices in the immediate future are scant and ugly. But there are still a few options to pursue, and the alternatives are so horrible that it is worth trying once again, as long as everyone understands that there is little time left and the odds are very long.”