Home
President is forced to withdraw troops to improve his chances of re-election, but Baghdad has become the US Middle East headquarters
By Mohammad Akef Jamal, Special to Gulf News
Published: 00:00 November 17, 2011
US President Barack Obama announced on October 21 the complete and final drawdown of US troops from Iraq in accordance with the Status of Forces Agreement (Sofa) that was signed in 2008.
However, Obama did not forget to enclose a message to an undisclosed party to the effect that Washington will remain alert.
Coinciding with Obama’s announcement, the New York Times wrote that the US will enhance its military presence in the Arab Gulf by sending additional naval vessels. Other news reports also pointed to the possibility of American quick intervention forces being stationed in one of the countries near Iraq to monitor all movements that may threaten Iraq’s stability.
US troops have been withdrawing from Iraq since June 2009.
Obama's Iraq gameplan
President is forced to withdraw troops to improve his chances of re-election, but Baghdad has become the US Middle East headquarters
US President Barack Obama announced on October 21 the complete and final drawdown of US troops from Iraq in accordance with the Status of Forces Agreement (Sofa) that was signed in 2008.
However, Obama did not forget to enclose a message to an undisclosed party to the effect that Washington will remain alert.
Coinciding with Obama’s announcement, the New York Times wrote that the US will enhance its military presence in the Arab Gulf by sending additional naval vessels. Other news reports also pointed to the possibility of American quick intervention forces being stationed in one of the countries near Iraq to monitor all movements that may threaten Iraq’s stability.
US troops have been withdrawing from Iraq since June 2009.
Article continues below
The war in Iraq has been unpopular in the US. Americans had very little sympathy for it, especially after the lies and fabrications in Washington and London were revealed. These were used to mislead public opinion in the lead-up to the war.
In reality, Obama’s decision to pull out US forces from Iraq on time is in accordance with the promises he made to the people who voted for him in 2008, and will most certainly serve him well in the forthcoming election campaign. According to a recent Gallup poll, 75 per cent of the respondents backed Obama’s decision.
The US military drawdown will have repercussions on many levels, but I would like to emphasise the political aspects of the issue.
We will be oversimplifying the matter if we talk about the US withdrawal as though it were a real pullout from Iraq. The US has agendas that are big to be contained by the desire of its president to improve his chances of being re-elected; Iraq has become the US headquarters in the Middle East.
Moreover, the US embassy in Baghdad is the biggest in the world, and the number of employees is far in excess of what the US needs to meet its obligations in Iraq. It will be very difficult to talk about the absence of the US in Iraq after December 31, as the US is not alone in its desire to continue with its presence in Iraq. There are many political forces in the country that want the Americans to stay, though they do not air their views in public.
The US presence in Iraq will just take another form. The heavy US military presence in the Gulf and its many bases in the region, in addition to its intelligence capabilities, are its guarantees. Moreover, after the invasion of Iraq, the US supervised a political process which relied on fragile balances that are difficult to maintain without the Americans as mediators or as a force.
All this does not encourage the perception that a military and political withdrawal from Iraq at this stage will contribute towards the stability and security of the country.
Security concerns
Despite the improvement in Iraq’s security, the country still witnesses terrorist attacks that result in many civilian casualties. Iraq also witnesses assassinations of its educated elite. It is also not prepared to defend its borders as its armed forces are lacking in every aspect. The condition of the army may well be attributed to the US desire to keep Iraq in need of its protection.
The overall US military withdrawal from Iraq may also be explained based on the fantasies of some inside the country who claim that the resistance was behind the US defeat. However, the truth is entirely different. The US was not defeated in Iraq, and the political project it sponsored is not defeated either.
The US did not encounter any resistance upon invading the country, and the resistance following the invasion was not strong enough for it to withdraw.
The US has lost about 4,482 troops since the invasion in 2003. The number is the highest endured by America since the end of its war in Vietnam; however that was not reason enough for withdrawal either.
In 2003, the US lost 486 of its troops, and then during the next four years, it lost between 850-900 troops annually. The number was reduced in 2008 to 314 in 2008, 149 in 2009, and 46 in 2010.
The US troop withdrawal from Iraq will not mark the end of US presence and influence in Iraq.
Although the withdrawal decision was welcomed by many because it is in line with international doctrines and frees the US — overtly — from any obligations towards Iraq, the Obama administration will find itself forced to take measures to ensure that they continue to exercise control. This is because the US military establishment believes that withdrawing totally would not contribute to maintaining security and stability in the Middle East.
The Obama administration will also have to tackle the Republicans’ opposition to the complete drawdown.
“Today marks a harmful and sad setback for the United States in the world,” said Senator John McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential candidate who was defeated by Obama. “I respectfully disagree with the president: this decision will be viewed as a strategic victory for our enemies in the Middle East.”
The current frontrunner for the 2012 Republican nomination, Governor Mitt Romney, also assailed the decision, insisting that the military commanders on the ground were opposed to a total withdrawal.
“President Obama’s astonishing failure to secure an orderly transition in Iraq has unnecessarily put at risk the victories that were won through the blood and sacrifice of thousands of American men and women,” he said.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
By Mohammad Akef Jamal, Special to Gulf News
Published: 00:00 November 17, 2011
US President Barack Obama announced on October 21 the complete and final drawdown of US troops from Iraq in accordance with the Status of Forces Agreement (Sofa) that was signed in 2008.
However, Obama did not forget to enclose a message to an undisclosed party to the effect that Washington will remain alert.
Coinciding with Obama’s announcement, the New York Times wrote that the US will enhance its military presence in the Arab Gulf by sending additional naval vessels. Other news reports also pointed to the possibility of American quick intervention forces being stationed in one of the countries near Iraq to monitor all movements that may threaten Iraq’s stability.
US troops have been withdrawing from Iraq since June 2009.
Obama's Iraq gameplan
President is forced to withdraw troops to improve his chances of re-election, but Baghdad has become the US Middle East headquarters
US President Barack Obama announced on October 21 the complete and final drawdown of US troops from Iraq in accordance with the Status of Forces Agreement (Sofa) that was signed in 2008.
However, Obama did not forget to enclose a message to an undisclosed party to the effect that Washington will remain alert.
Coinciding with Obama’s announcement, the New York Times wrote that the US will enhance its military presence in the Arab Gulf by sending additional naval vessels. Other news reports also pointed to the possibility of American quick intervention forces being stationed in one of the countries near Iraq to monitor all movements that may threaten Iraq’s stability.
US troops have been withdrawing from Iraq since June 2009.
Article continues below
The war in Iraq has been unpopular in the US. Americans had very little sympathy for it, especially after the lies and fabrications in Washington and London were revealed. These were used to mislead public opinion in the lead-up to the war.
In reality, Obama’s decision to pull out US forces from Iraq on time is in accordance with the promises he made to the people who voted for him in 2008, and will most certainly serve him well in the forthcoming election campaign. According to a recent Gallup poll, 75 per cent of the respondents backed Obama’s decision.
The US military drawdown will have repercussions on many levels, but I would like to emphasise the political aspects of the issue.
We will be oversimplifying the matter if we talk about the US withdrawal as though it were a real pullout from Iraq. The US has agendas that are big to be contained by the desire of its president to improve his chances of being re-elected; Iraq has become the US headquarters in the Middle East.
Moreover, the US embassy in Baghdad is the biggest in the world, and the number of employees is far in excess of what the US needs to meet its obligations in Iraq. It will be very difficult to talk about the absence of the US in Iraq after December 31, as the US is not alone in its desire to continue with its presence in Iraq. There are many political forces in the country that want the Americans to stay, though they do not air their views in public.
The US presence in Iraq will just take another form. The heavy US military presence in the Gulf and its many bases in the region, in addition to its intelligence capabilities, are its guarantees. Moreover, after the invasion of Iraq, the US supervised a political process which relied on fragile balances that are difficult to maintain without the Americans as mediators or as a force.
All this does not encourage the perception that a military and political withdrawal from Iraq at this stage will contribute towards the stability and security of the country.
Security concerns
Despite the improvement in Iraq’s security, the country still witnesses terrorist attacks that result in many civilian casualties. Iraq also witnesses assassinations of its educated elite. It is also not prepared to defend its borders as its armed forces are lacking in every aspect. The condition of the army may well be attributed to the US desire to keep Iraq in need of its protection.
The overall US military withdrawal from Iraq may also be explained based on the fantasies of some inside the country who claim that the resistance was behind the US defeat. However, the truth is entirely different. The US was not defeated in Iraq, and the political project it sponsored is not defeated either.
The US did not encounter any resistance upon invading the country, and the resistance following the invasion was not strong enough for it to withdraw.
The US has lost about 4,482 troops since the invasion in 2003. The number is the highest endured by America since the end of its war in Vietnam; however that was not reason enough for withdrawal either.
In 2003, the US lost 486 of its troops, and then during the next four years, it lost between 850-900 troops annually. The number was reduced in 2008 to 314 in 2008, 149 in 2009, and 46 in 2010.
The US troop withdrawal from Iraq will not mark the end of US presence and influence in Iraq.
Although the withdrawal decision was welcomed by many because it is in line with international doctrines and frees the US — overtly — from any obligations towards Iraq, the Obama administration will find itself forced to take measures to ensure that they continue to exercise control. This is because the US military establishment believes that withdrawing totally would not contribute to maintaining security and stability in the Middle East.
The Obama administration will also have to tackle the Republicans’ opposition to the complete drawdown.
“Today marks a harmful and sad setback for the United States in the world,” said Senator John McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential candidate who was defeated by Obama. “I respectfully disagree with the president: this decision will be viewed as a strategic victory for our enemies in the Middle East.”
The current frontrunner for the 2012 Republican nomination, Governor Mitt Romney, also assailed the decision, insisting that the military commanders on the ground were opposed to a total withdrawal.
“President Obama’s astonishing failure to secure an orderly transition in Iraq has unnecessarily put at risk the victories that were won through the blood and sacrifice of thousands of American men and women,” he said.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
