Prelude to the Iraq Study Group
http://www.independent.org/publications/the_lighthouse/detail.asp?id=156
Two new op-eds from the Independent Institute size up the likely
recommendations of the Iraq Study Group to be released later
this week. In "The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly," Charles Pena,
the latest addition to the Center on Peace & Liberty, examines
three options: "go home," "go big," and "go long" (i.e., first
increase U.S. troop levels, then scale them back). Also, Pena
argues that none of these options will significantly curb the
sectarian violence pulling Iraq apart.
"The proposed 'go long' troop increase is insufficient to mount
a serious counterinsurgency military effort," writes Pena. "But
it is more than enough to give Iraqis greater reason to chafe
under the yoke of foreign occupation to fuel, rather than
dissipate, the insurgency and for Muslims to increase the call
for jihad to expel the infidel. The result will be to make an
already ugly situation even uglier."
In "The Coming Clash Over Iraq Policy," Ivan Eland, director of
the Center on Peace & Liberty,examines a range of criticism of
Bush's steadfastness. They range from that of outgoing Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who recommends that we lower our
expectations for Iraq, to that of Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), who
has said that if the U.S. doesn't send more troops, it would be
immoral to continue to risk the lives of the troops currently
stationed there. In addition, more criticism would likely come
from politicians running for election in 2008.
"The Democrats are also rhetorically pressuring the president to
leave," writes Eland, "but may secretly hope that he stays, thus
insuring their electoral sweep in 2008. If they are smart, the
Democrats will give the president just enough rope to
figuratively hang himself. They will provide all the funding he
wants so that he can't say that they 'lost Iraq' -- as Henry
Kissinger and the Republicans did when the Democratic Congress
cut off funding for the Vietnam War. But the Democrats will
continue pushing to withdraw, thus highlighting an alternative
to their Republican colleagues, who will be again tied to the
cement overshoes of war."
"The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly," by Charles Pena (11/27/06)
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1859
"Lo bueno, lo malo, y lo feo"
http://www.elindependent.org/articulos/article.asp?id=1859
"The Coming Clash Over Iraq Policy," by Ivan Eland (12/4/06)
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1863
"El enfrentamiento sobre la política de Irak que se viene"
http://www.elindependent.org/articulos/article.asp?id=1863
THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES: U.S. Foreign Policy Exposed, by Ivan
Eland
http://www.independent.org/store/book_detail.asp?bookID=54
"The Way Out of Iraq: Decentralizing the Iraqi Government," by
Ivan Eland
http://www.independent.org/store/policy_reports/detail.asp?id=16
Center on Peace & Liberty (Ivan Eland, Director)
http://www.independent.org/research/copal/
========================
Iraq Study Group’s Timetable for Withdrawal Inadequate
Senior Fellow Ivan Eland Available for Interviews on Iraq Study
Group Report
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/
“The Congressional Republicans and Democrats who will likely
embrace the Iraq Study Group’s Report, will resemble passengers
on a sinking ship clutching life preservers,” said Ivan Eland,
Senior Fellow and Director of the Center on Peace and Liberty at
the Independent Institute in Washington, D.C.
Eland, who is also a former Investigator for the House Foreign
Affairs Committee, Principal Defense Analyst at the
Congressional Budget Office, and Evaluator–in–Charge (national
security and intelligence) for the U.S. General Accounting
Office, is based out of Washington, D.C. and is available for
interviews about the Iraq Study Group's Report.
“All options have not been exhausted. We believe it is still
possible to pursue different policies that can give Iraq an
opportunity for a better future, combat terrorism, stabilize a
critical region of the world and protect America's credibility,
interests and values,” stated a letter from James A. Baker III
and Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.).
What are Those Policies?
“The group report blames the Iraqis for the current chaos, and
is not radical enough in its course correction to have any hope
of saving the rapidly deteriorating situation,” said Eland.
Given President Bush's rigid adherence to the disastrous status
quo, as demonstrated by his recent comments and his attempts to
marginalize the study group’s report, the report offers the
safety of a sinking ship.
“Both the administration's current policy and the study group’s
recommendations do not recognize that Iraq is already
effectively partitioned, with many militias controlling vast
areas,” said Eland, who for years has been a leading advocate of
partitioning. “Both also fail to alleviate the main causes of
violence in Iraq: the U.S. occupation and the fight over a
centralized government, its power to oppress groups that don't
control it, and the oil resources that it controls," said Eland.
“The U.S. needs to threaten to withdraw all forces from the
country rapidly, thus threatening to pull out the last remaining
pillar under the Shi’ite/Kurdish regime, to spur the groups to
share oil or oil revenues with the Sunnis.
“Such sharing is needed to get the Sunnis to agree to
decentralize Iraqi governance—either granting Iraqi groups
autonomy in their regions, or partitioning the country. A
decentralized Iraq will greatly diminish Sunni/Shi’ite violence,
because a weak or nonexistent central government is much less
likely to oppress a group or groups that don't control it.
“A U.S. withdrawal would take the fire out of the Sunni
insurgency. A similar autonomy/oil–sharing agreement recently
ended the bloody Sudanese civil war.”
Dr. Eland is available for interviews. Please call or e-mail:
East Coast: Callie Rucker Oettinger, 703/451-2476,
callie@o-a-inc.com
West Coast: Pat Rose, 510/632-1366,
prose@independent.org