The Democracy Journal
Search Site
Get Involved
This form does not yet contain any fields.
    Support the PJRC

    Support the PJRC for continued original analysis on ending the wars, funding domestic priorities and preserving civil liberties.

    Make a contribution to benefit the PJRC now! 

    Conferences & Events

    Tom Hayden speaks in Port Huron, MI, in celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Port Huron Statement.

    Invite Tom Hayden to speak in your town! 



    Follow Tom


    Contact Us
    This form does not yet contain any fields.

      US Combat Ends in Iraq, But US Covert Operations Continue

      While the Obama administration struggles to keep its pledge to end  the Iraq war, a behind-the-scenes plan is developing in which the Baghdad regime “invites” the American military to stay.
      While media attention focused this week on the last combat brigade rolling out of Iraq, US diplomat Ryan Crocker was saying that if the Iraqis “come to us later on this year requesting that we jointly relook at the post-2011 period, it is going to be in our strategic interest to be responsive.” [NYT, Aug. 19]
      That means troops and bases, keeping a US strategic outpost in the Middle East.  Otherwise, according to some Pentagon sources, the Iraq war will have been in vain.
      To prevent backsliding on the agreement to withdraw all troops and bases by the end of 2011, peace advocates and Congress will have to revisit and reinforce those agreements using hearings and budgetary powers.
      To review the history: in late 2008, a secret negotiation resulted in what the Iraqis called “the withdrawal agreement” and the Americans the “status of forces agreement.” The bilateral pact was never debated or approved by the US Congress. By its adoption, the Iraqis could claim a victory for sovereignty while the US could declare a diplomatic end to an unpopular war.
      In reality, the Iraq war never ended. US casualties plummeted because fewer Iraqis wanted to shoot Americans who were leaving. Iraqi casualties declined from the feverish high of 2006-7, but continue to be several hundred per month. Al Qaeda of Mesopotamia, which did not exist when the war began, has survived. The forces of Moktada al-Sadr, who waged two uprisings against the US, are a powerful factor in Iraqi politics and on the ground. The Kurdish crisis is unsolved. Overall, Iran has prevailed strategically and politically. And the Baghdad regime originally installed by the Americans seems hopeless deadlocked, inefficient, and on the edge of imploding.  
      The State Department is expanding a militarized “civilian” intervention to fill the gap as Pentagon troops depart. Thousands of military contractors will conduct Iraqi police training, protect Iraq’s airspace, and possibly conduct continued counterterrorism operations. State Department operatives will be protected in mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles [MRAPS], armored vehicles, helicopters and its own planes.
      The immediate future is uncertain. US soldiers currently being sent to Iraq are told their mission is “to shut it down.” But the real story is being hidden by the Obama administration’s insistence that its promise to end the war is being kept. The notion of a continued military presence, according to the Times, “has been all but banished from public discussion.” According to one official, “the administration does not want to touch this question right now.”
      A war that started with dreams of bringing democracy to the Middle East is ending by keeping plans for more troops hidden from American voters.

      PrintView Printer Friendly Version

      EmailEmail Article to Friend

      Reader Comments (1)

      With 50,000 US troops to stay in Iraq, the Obama Adminsitration is continuing to fight in Iraq to contain the influence of the Iranian dictatorship. As Tom Hayden wrote above, it is clear that the outcome of the Bush invasion of 2003 was the destruction of the Iraqi state and a huge boost to the regional influence of these Mullahs in Tehran. The Bush team may have conceived a 'resource war' in Iraq, but they have lost it. It would be wise to get a better understanding of the come-back of secular nationalist Iraqis in the March elections, and to find ways to support them in the next month or so when they should be forming the next Iraqi government. Maybe then there can be a new phase of withdrawal of US forces, and a roll-bak of the Iranian dictatorship.

      August 19, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterPeter Murphy

      PostPost a New Comment

      Enter your information below to add a new comment.
      Author Email (optional):
      Author URL (optional):
      All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.