The Great Debate
20:10 July 2nd, 2009

Is Iraq stable enough to cope without U.S. troops?

Tags: Uncategorized, , , , , ,

Tim Cocks-Tim Cocks is a Reuters correspondent based in Baghdad.-

For the U.S. military, it’s the million dollar question — or rather the $687 billion question, according to a recent estimate of the Iraq war’s total cost. Is Iraq now stable enough for them to take a permanent back seat?

The short answer is no one knows. The only way they were ever going to find out was to leave Iraq’s own forces to it and hope the whole thing doesn’t come tumbling down. They started doing that on Tuesday when they pulled out of Iraqi cities.

It’s been an encouraging start. A big bomb in Kirkuk cast a shadow over Iraq’s celebrations of its new-found sovereignty, but since then things have been relatively quiet. Militants might try to take advantage by stepping up attacks, but for the moment they seem content with celebrating a “victory” over the occupation — and setting off the odd bomb, of course.

The United States’ coalition partners have for the most part long since departed. British forces handed over southern Iraq to the Americans in April, but since 2007 their 4,000 odd troops left had been largely confined to Basra airport anyway.

And one thing the crystal ball gazers have learned about Iraq’s hugely complicated, many-sided conflict is that the past is rarely a reliable guide to the future.

When optimists thought Iraq was poised to enjoy democracy after the fall of Saddam, it spiralled into years of bloody insurgency and sectarian killing. Later, just when it seemed all hope was lost and Iraq would have to be partitioned, things starting getting dramatically better.

The idea that Iraqi forces aren’t ready to take on the country’s security usually centre on claims that they are untested, not well trained or infiltrated with militiamen.

But few deny they look more professional and integrated now than anyone would have thought possible two years ago. They might still be full of militiamen, but those militiamen are no longer kidnapping or killing political rivals, as in the past.

And there are clearly some things the Iraqis do better. For one thing, they know the language and understand the culture.

When I was on a U.S. patrol in Iraq’s troubled Diyala province, a U.S. unit nearby accidentallly shot and wounded a civilian in Jalawla town, forcing them to vacate it because a public outcry would put other soldiers at risk of attack.

What they had done is fire a warning shot at a vehicle after the driver failed to heed a command — in English — to stay back. But few Iraqis in rural areas speak basic English.

The real test will be when U.S. pulls all combat forces out, under President Barack Obama’s orders, by September next year.

Many Iraqis I’ve spoken too seem convinced the insurgents are just biding their time, sharpening their knives and stockpiling explosives waiting to reignite the conflict.

But whether or not Iraq can look after itself, at some point the Americans have to say: Look, we’ve done our best to get the lid back on Pandora’s Box. Now it’s over to you.

Best Comment

July 3rd, 2009
8:38 am EDT
No, there will be a struggle for power as soon as the Us leaves the country. Iraq is too divided, and there are too many unsolved cultural, polital and religious issues for Iraq to become a peaceful and safe place to live.
-Posted by Nikkei 225

26 comments so far

July 10th, 2009 6:03 am GMT - Posted by The Bell

More to the point: Can any of the 168,000 Americans from Gulf War One and literally countless Iraqi civilians ever expect to recover from the sickening effects of depleted Uranium spread over thousands of square miles of that country? When will they be stable enough to cope without water and schools, but with plenty of prison camps?

Bound to find out eventually, aren’t we? Unlike Pandora, “we” didn’t open the box so much as blow it to smithereens and contaminate all of its contents, to see what was inside.

Are the people of Iraq, who never in all history attacked the countries of their current aggressors, jailers and occupants, ever likely to forget the hideously massive loss of life, health, social infrastructure, liberty and cultural artefacts which have gone hand in hand with this absolutely unjustified multi-trillion dollar war?

How can Iraq be expected to deal with people who persistently quibble, it was “[only] $687 billion and [just] three hundred thousand lives”? Uncharitably, if at all, I would imagine.

On an entertainment note:

In versions of Casablanca I have seen, the line where Humphrey Bogart apparently wonders whether the French, Polish and Russians were stable enough to cope without the presence of Panzer-Divisions, associated carcinogenic chemical weaponry, rape, pillaging and so forth must have been… uh, omitted.

Quaint question, though.

July 6th, 2009 2:41 am GMT - Posted by Anubis

You are right Bob, many of the deaths are suicide bombings and other forms of sectarian violence that did not exist under Saddam’s regime. This was in no small part due to his brutality. However the loss of infrastructure from the initial bombings by U.S. forces prior to the invasion left Bahgdad in ruins. No fresh water, electricity, medical supplies, fresh food and destroyed sanitation systems lead to starvation and disease killing the elderly and youngest of the population. Amnesty International has tried to do an accounting of mortality and disease rates in Iraq since the first gulf war. Dealing with any government is problematic when trying to uncover such information. I don’t think anyone really knows for sure.

July 5th, 2009 4:19 pm GMT - Posted by ZT

I had to ruin your conspiracy theory, Hoang, but Iraq is a relativly small player in the world oil industry (only about 1% of the US supply, for example) that the war was never designed to influence world oil prices. Oil prices effect the war, though, since the revenue is neccesarry to rebuild the country’s economy, and also a cause for sectarian violence.

July 5th, 2009 1:31 pm GMT - Posted by Michael Ham

Iraq a mess during the Saddam administration and an even worse mess now, just look at how the families are living. (hard to find since no media outlet ever shows it, including Reuters)

What do we say now to all fatherless children here in America? What do we tell them their fathers died for? Do we tell them the depressing truth or lie to their faces?

July 5th, 2009 10:20 am GMT - Posted by niyaz/Erbil

As a person who lives in Kurdistan region of Iraq ui can not be optimistic about the future of Iraq. There is no difference whether the US troops will stay or not. Iraq got it’s independent since 1920 and throughout that time there has been always problems inside Iraq. Problems lingering among Shia, Sunni, and Kurds. Still thses problems exist and the Iraqi government has noty made any concerted efforts to slove the disputes between Iraqi sections. Currently the tension between the central government and the Kurdistan regional governmernt has resurfaced again and the central government is not doing a serious efoorts to solve the issue. The best solution for Iraq is to be seperated to three federal region as V.Presidnet Joe Biden suggested. As a Kurd we are unwilingly part of iraq and we do not want to rmain so, personally i advocate the idea of seceding from iraq as soon as possible. Also in the Middle and south of iraq Shia and Sunni can not get along, it is impossible for them to live together. SO if Iraq remain unified it will cause catastrophy. The sooner Iraq divides the better for all Iraqi people.

July 5th, 2009 9:41 am GMT - Posted by Hoang Thanh Nguyen

I think once the US TROOP pull out IRAQ, oil will reach at least 150 to 200 per barrel. Since they cannot pay the money, they will negotiate to pay by OIL. IRAQ will take advantage to sell OIL at higher price.

Post Your Comment

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word

House Rules:
  • We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential
  • We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous.information.