Posted on 12/07/2006 11:50:27 PM PST by MadIvan
The recommendations of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group were broadly welcomed by most Republicans and Democrats in Washington yesterday, but received a far cooler reception in Iraq, Iran, Israel and from the US military.
The report, which calls for the withdrawal of all US combat troops from Iraq by early 2008, negotiations with Iran and Syria, and a renewed Middle East peace initiative, was a rare triumph of political compromise in Washington.
But for those directly affected by the Iraq war and the wider regional instability — the Iraqis themselves, Israel and the US troops on the ground — the report was widely seen as unrealistic and provocative. In Baghdad, it was branded by some influential Sunnis as designed to solve American, rather than Iraqi, problems.
The commission, headed by James Baker, delivered to President Bush on Wednesday 79 recommendations it believes gives Iraq a chance of stability. The report described the situation in Iraq as grave and cautioned that the country is on the verge of sliding into chaos.
In Iraq, the report’s call for a regional conference unnerved Kurds and Shias, who feared that it would be used as a pretext to strip back the power they have won since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein.
The Shia elite worries that such a conference would be used by neighbouring Sunni Arab nations to reshape the country. Their fears appeared justified as the country’s Sunni minority gave the report a more favourable response.
Sami al-Askari, an MP and adviser to Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi Prime Minister, said: “Some of the neighbouring countries, especially the Saudis . . . are going to press for a settlement that favours the Sunnis.”
He said that many Americans misunderstood what was happening in Iraq. “They think Iraq is hesitating to take responsibility, but it is the Americans who have opposed the transfer of any major authority in security.”
Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Prime Minister, dismissed the panel’s call for Israel to open negotiations with Syria, Lebanon and the Palestinians. The report states that all problems in the broader Middle East, from Iraq to the Israel-Palestine conflict, are interlinked. “The Middle East has a lot of problems that are not connected to us,” Mr Olmert said.
The report called for direct US negotiations with Iran to help to stabilise Iraq. An Iranian official expressed exasperation that the only “carrot” offered by the panel to Tehran was “no regime change”. The chances of Iran agreeing to help the US in Iraq appear slim.
Several retired US military generals who gave testimony to the panel said that the pullout plan was unworkable. They pointed out that the report’s idea of stepping up the training of Iraqi forces, while drawing down US troops, was precisely the plan suggested by General George Casey, the head of coalition forces in Iraq, in June. Since then the violence has escalated and the plan was abandoned.
Regards, Ivan
Ping!
The man's a scumbag.
L
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
That's a bit harsh, but Prince Bandar was always a big man in DC when Bush 41 was in office....I think you are right in that this new policy recommendation is arguably "Saudophile" and comes from people accustomed to collaborating with the Saudis. A lot of water has passed under the bridge since 1992, though.
I wonder if Baker's group could be described as being too 9/10 in their outlook?
My own question is, how many cities is this going to cost us down the road, if 43 can't find a way to fight these guys off? Bet on it, that Big Dick Cheney is hiding out in his lair, working on a way to do just that. Cheney's a stud -- and a constitutional officer himself, he doesn't serve at the President's pleasure. We haven't heard the last of him yet.
Exactly, it's a purely political document, adding nothing of value.
Baker has cashed checks from the Saudis as recently as this year.
L
It's a bunch of senile men dreaming of being statesmen -- something that none of them, including the Kissinger wannabee Baker, ever were.
They are all but one on the graveyard side of seventy (and he's 67 or 68). They are primarily career politicians who think that our opponents in this war are as unprincipled and purchaseable as they themselves are.
Hey they went to Iraq, though... they spent HOURS on the ground.
You may recollect that this was LBJ's fundamental error. He thought that if he just found the right bribe, he could buy off Ho Chi Minh. What Ho wanted was victory -- as a committed, dedicated communist and nationalist, his mind was completely foreign to LBJ.
By the same token, these liver-spotted seem to think that Islamic terrorists can be bought off.
Maybe by giving them their global caliphate, with all the world's women reduced to being illiterate property, swathed in abayas and genitally mutilated.
Of course the beltway people love the report. It's all about how great a bunch of beltway people are... the Oscar lifetime achievement award for cynical old pols.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
Why should they buy what they already own? The Saudis could have written the report themselves, and it would scarcely look any different.
They've purchased a huge propaganda victory for a pittance. Baker and his 'committee' should be horse whipped, tarred and feathered, and ridden out of DC on a rail.
L
" The report called for direct US negotiations with Iran to help to stabilise Iraq. An Iranian official expressed exasperation that the only “carrot” offered by the panel to Tehran was “no regime change”. The chances of Iran agreeing to help the US in Iraq appear slim "
Well, isn't that just *special*??
Iran isn't satisfied that we're gonna tacitly cede to them hegemony over the Middle East ( the oil-producing parts, at least) - they're holding out for tribute....
(And, if the American Media and its Dem lapdogs have their way, they'll probably get it....)
I think the plan has some merit. It might be better to have one united Iraq (over the long term) as opposed to three "Kashmirs" (over the short-term).
Considering the source, it's consistent.
Just struck me how DC is the US version of the Green Zone. No wonder the DBM are so adamant about staying in the Iraqi version. It's just like home for them.
Great post - nails it, unfortunately.
19. "We recommend that the allies keep in frequent contact, and work closely with, the current Iraqi government."
Really? Interesting that I haven't read about any that are touting the Baker scheme, but admittedly I've not been able to keep very current with news recently.
Am I possibly detecting a bit of lamestream media orgasmic bias, hmmm??
What the HELL does Sandra Day O'Connor, Vernon Jordan, Alan Simpson, Leon Pinheada and the rest of the dwarf- thinkers know about WAR????? and IRAQ????? Hamilton, and Baker are even iffy......but when I heard this panel being named I thought it was a JOKE......sadly, it IS a joke, albeit a very bad one.....they have sold our country away for a promise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.