By Michael G. Williams and William Herrfeldt
THE ERICKSON TRIBUNE

No issue in memory has been as politically divisive as the war in Iraq. Most Republicans insist that our country press on until the Iraqis themselves are capable of providing their citizens with a secure and prosperous country, while most Democrats insist that a timetable be established for a troop withdrawal, regardless of the war’s status.

While the reason for being in Iraq may be debatable, many Republicans and Democrats agree that neither the military nor the White House seem to have any exit strategy planned for bringing our troops home. Dakota L. Wood, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington, D.C., uses our involvement in World War II as an example.

“In World War II, beating the Germans was the priority before you brought our people home,” he says. “In those days, there was no alternative. The best exit strategy for us in Iraq is to accomplish what we set out to do.”

Costs, casualties
But some point to the costs already mounted as a reason for leaving Iraq. According to Ted Galen Carpenter, vice president for defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C., the U.S. has already lost more than 3,000 lives and spent more than $350 billion in a war that seems without end.

“Iraq has become both a training ground and a recruiting poster for Islamic extremists,” he says. “U.S. occupation of Iraq has become yet another grievance throughout the Muslim world and has exacerbated our already worrisome problem with radical Islamic terrorism.”

And while the question of whether the U.S. should have been in Iraq at all remains a prominent point of focus on the Presidential campaign trail, policy specialists and military strategists are quick to point out its irrelevance.

“History will go back through the records to say whether it was a good or bad idea when the decision was made in 2003, but that was almost five years ago,” Wood says. “We are where we are at today, and we have to deal with the situation that has been handed to us.”

Bringing stability to Iraq
So what is the status of the situation? According to James Phillips, a Middle East analyst for the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., the key objective is working to stabilize the democratic Iraqi government currently in place. In order to accomplish this, several things are necessary.

First, Phillips notes that incorporating provincial power centers comparable to local governments in the U.S. will give Iraqi communities control over their own affairs, reducing the incentive for factions to attempt to take control of the entire country.

Also, U.S. military forces must protect Iraqis against the threat posed by neighboring countries Iran and Syria, as well as insurgent forces, until they are able to do so themselves.

“It’s important that we help the Iraqis defeat or co-op as many insurgents as possible and uproot Al Qaeda and other irreconcilables,” Phillips says. “They have to be dealt with through force, and without security a democratic government is impossible in the long run.”

Even though a democratic government is up and running, it’s a system plagued by police brutality, corruption, and intimidation from terrorist organizations, only adding to the challenges U.S. troops face. Much work remains, but Phillips also points out that we’ve made some progress. “We’re training police, pressing the Iraqi government to purge corrupt elements and those that have infiltrated the police forces, and we’re putting pressure on Shia leaders to distance themselves from radical Shia militias such as the Mahdi Army,” Phillips says.

Considering this progress in combination with the nature of the war itself, experts like Phillips and Wood believe that a timetable for a troop withdrawal would be a mistake.

Carpenter disagrees. In his view, the idea that Iraq would become a stable democracy and a model for the rest of the Middle East is implausible.

‘Cost in blood and treasure’
According to Carpenter, the U.S. is losing troops at a rate of 800 per year, while spending is upwards of $8 billion per month.

“There is no reasonable prospect of success even if we pay the additional cost in blood and treasure,” he says. “It is time to admit that the Iraq mission has failed and cut our losses.”

And while others like Phillips and Wood argue that Americans should leave matters to the judgment of generals in the field, a troop withdrawal remains a central topic in the upcoming Presidential election, thus giving voters a hand in the outcome.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.