Andrew J. Bacevich graduated from West Point in 1969 and served in
He offers the following thoughts about the “success” of the surge in
… By shifting the conversation to tactics, they seek to divert attention from flagrant failures of basic strategy. Yet what exactly has the surge wrought? In substantive terms, the answer is: not much.
As the violence in Baghdad and Anbar province abates, the political and economic dysfunction enveloping Iraq has become all the more apparent. The recent agreement to rehabilitate some former Baathists notwithstand ing, signs of lasting Sunni-Shiite reconciliation are scant. The
has acquired a ramshackle, ungovernable and unresponsive dependency that is incapable of securing its own borders or managing its own affairs. More than three years after then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice handed President Bush a note announcing that " United States is sovereign," that sovereignty remains a fiction. Iraq
A nation-building project launched in the confident expectation that the
United Stateswould repeat in Iraqthe successes it had achieved in Germany and Japan after 1945 instead compares unfavorably with the response to Hurricane Katrina. Even today, Iraqi electrical generation meets barely half the daily national requirements. U.S. households now receive power an average of 12 hours each day -- six hours fewer than when Saddam Hussein ruled. Oil production still has not returned to pre-invasion levels. Reports of widespread fraud, waste and sheer ineptitude in the administration of Baghdad aid have become so commonplace that they barely last a news cycle. (Recall, for example, the 110,000 AK-47s, 80,000 pistols, 135,000 items of body armor and 115,000 helmets intended for Iraqi security forces that, according to the Government Accountability Office, the Pentagon cannot account for.) U.S. officials repeatedly complain, to little avail, about the paralyzing squabbling inside the Iraqi parliament and the rampant corruption within Iraqi ministries. If a primary function of government is to provide services, then the government of U.S. can hardly be said to exist. Iraq
Moreover, recent evidence suggests that the
United Statesis tacitly abandoning its efforts to create a truly functional government in . By offering arms and bribes to Sunni insurgents -- an initiative that has been far more important to the temporary reduction in the level of violence than the influx of additional American troops -- U.S. forces have affirmed the fundamental irrelevance of the political apparatus bunkered inside the Green Zone. Baghdad
Rather than fostering political reconciliation, accommodating Sunni tribal leaders ratifies the ethnic cleansing that resulted from the civil war touched off by the February 2006 bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra, a Shiite shrine. That conflict has shredded the fragile connective tissue linking the various elements of Iraqi society; the deals being cut with insurgent factions serve only to ratify that dismal outcome. First Sgt. Richard Meiers of the Army's 3rd Infantry Division got it exactly right: "We're paying them not to blow us up. It looks good right now, but what happens when the money stops?"
In only one respect has the surge achieved undeniable success: It has ensured that
troops won't be coming home anytime soon. This was one of the main points of the exercise in the first place. As AEI military analyst Thomas Donnelly has acknowledged with admirable candor, "part of the purpose of the surge was to redefine the U.S. Washingtonnarrative," thereby deflecting calls for a complete withdrawal of combat forces. Hawks who had pooh-poohed the risks of invasion now portrayed the risks of withdrawal as too awful to contemplate. But a prerequisite to perpetuating the war -- and leaving it to the next president -- was to get U.S. off the front pages and out of the nightly news. At least in this context, the surge qualifies as a masterstroke. From his new perch as a New York Times columnist, William Kristol has worried that feckless politicians just might "snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory." Not to worry: The "victory" gained in recent months all but guarantees that the Iraq United Stateswill remain caught in the jaws of for the foreseeable future. Iraq
Such success comes at a cost.
U.S.casualties in have recently declined. Yet since Petraeus famously testified before Congress last September, Iraqi insurgents have still managed to kill more than 100 Americans. Meanwhile, to fund the war, the Pentagon is burning through somewhere between $2 billion and $3 billion per week. Given that further changes in U.S. policy are unlikely between now and the time that the next administration can take office and get its bearings, the lavish expenditure of American lives and treasure is almost certain to continue indefinitely. Iraq
But how exactly do these sacrifices serve the national interest? What has the loss of nearly 4,000
U.S.troops and the commitment of about $1 trillion -- with more to come -- actually gained the ? United States
Bush had once counted on the
U.S.invasion of to pay massive dividends. Iraq was central to his administration's game plan for eliminating jihadist terrorism. It would demonstrate how Iraq power and beneficence could transform the Muslim world. Just months after the fall of U.S. Baghdad, the president declared, "The establishment of a free Iraqat the heart of the Middle East will be a watershed event in the global democratic revolution." Democracy's triumph in Baghdad, he announced, "will send forth the news, from Damascus to Tehran -- that freedom can be the future of every nation." In short, the administration saw not as a final destination but as a way station en route to even greater successes. Baghdad
In reality, the war's effects are precisely the inverse of those that Bush and his lieutenants expected.
has become a strategic cul-de-sac. Only the truly blinkered will imagine at this late date that Baghdad Iraqhas shown the to be the "stronger horse." In fact, the war has revealed the very real limits of United States power. And for good measure, it has boosted anti-Americanism to record levels, recruited untold numbers of new jihadists, enhanced the standing of adversaries such as Iran and diverted resources and attention from Afghanistan, a theater of war far more directly relevant to the threat posed by al-Qaeda. Instead of draining the jihadist swamp, the U.S. war is continuously replenishing it. Iraq
Look beyond the spin, the wishful thinking, the intellectual bullying and the myth-making. The real legacy of the surge is that it will enable Bush to bequeath the
Iraqwar to his successor -- no doubt cause for celebration at AEI, although perhaps less so for the families of troops. Yet the stubborn insistence that the war must continue also ensures that Bush's successor will, upon taking office, discover that the post-9/11 U.S. is strategically adrift. United States no longer has a coherent approach to dealing with Islamic radicalism. Certainly, the next president will not find in Washington Iraqa useful template to be applied in Iranor Syria or Pakistan.
According to the war's most fervent proponents, Bush's critics have become so "invested in defeat" that they cannot see the progress being made on the ground. Yet something similar might be said of those who remain so passionately invested in a futile war's perpetuation. They are unable to see that, surge or no surge, the
war remains an egregious strategic blunder that persistence will only compound. Iraq
You can read the entire piece here.