[Peace-discuss] Wallerstein on the war

[Lisa Chason]

>
>Commentary No. 167, August 15, 2005
>
>  "The U.S. Has Lost the Iraq War"
>
>  by Immanuel Wallerstein
>                http://fbc.binghamton.edu/commentr.htm
>
>  (In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is 
>distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest

>in receiving the included information for research and educational
>purposes.)
>
>  It's over. For the U.S. to win the Iraq war requires
>three things: defeating the Iraqi resistance;
>establishing a stable government in Iraq that is
>friendly to the U.S.; maintaining the support of the
>American people while the first two are being done.
>None of these three seem any longer possible. First,
>the U.S. military itself no longer believes it can
>defeat the resistance. Secondly, the likelihood that
>the Iraqi politicians can agree on a constitution is
>almost nil, and therefore the likelihood of a
>minimally stable central government is almost nil.
>Thirdly, the U.S. public is turning against the war
>because it sees no "light at the end of the tunnel."
>
>  As a result, the Bush regime is in an impossible
>position. It would like to withdraw in a dignified
>manner, asserting some semblance of victory. But, if
>it tries to do this, it will face ferocious anger and deception on the 
>part of the war party at home. And if it does not, it will face 
>ferocious anger on the part of the withdrawal party. It will end up 
>satisfying neither, lose face precipitously, and be remembered in
>ignominy.
>
>  Let us see what is happening. This month, Gen. George
>Casey, the U.S. commanding general in Iraq, suggested
>that it may be possible to reduce U.S. troops in Iraq
>next year by 30,000, given improvements in the ability
>of the Iraqi government's armed forces to handle the situation. Almost 
>immediately, this position came under attack from the war party, and 
>the Pentagon amended this statement to suggest that maybe this
>wouldn't happen, since maybe the Iraqi forces were not
>yet ready to handle the situation, which is surely so.
>At the same time, stories appeared in the leading
>newspapers suggesting that the level of military
>sophistication of the insurgent forces has been
>growing steadily and remarkably. And the increased
>rate of killings of U.S. soldiers certainly bears this
>out.
>
>  In the debate on the Iraqi constitution, there are
>two major problems. One is the degree to which the constitution will 
>institutionalize Islamic law. It is conceivable that, given enough time

>and trust, there could be a compromise on this issue that would more or
>less satisfy most sides. But the second issue is more
>intractable. The Kurds, who still really want an
>independent state, will not settle for less than a
>federal structure that will guarantee their autonomy,
>the maintenance of their militia, and control of
>Kirkuk as their capital and its oil resources as their
>booty. The Shiites are currently divided between those
>who feel like the Kurds and want a federal structure,
>and those who prefer a strong central government
>provided they can control it and its resources, and
>provided that it will have an Islamic flavor. And the
>Sunnis are desperate to maintain a united state, one
>in which they will minimally get their fair share, and
>certainly don't want a state governed by Shia
>interpretations of Islam.
>
>  The U.S. has been trying to encourage some
>compromise, but it is hard to see what this might be.
>So, one of two possibilities are before us right now.
>The Iraqis paper over the differences in some way that
>will not last long. Or there is a more immediate
>breakdown in negotiations. Neither of these meets the
>needs of the U.S. Of course, there is one solution
>that might end the deadlock. The Iraqi politicians
>could join the resisters in a nationalist
>anti-American thrust, and thereby unite at least the
>non-Kurd part of the population. This development is
>not to be ruled out, and of course is a nightmare from
>the U.S. point of view.
>
>  But, for the Bush regime, the worst picture of all is
>on the home front. Approval rating of Bush for the
>conduct of the Iraqi war has gone down to 36 percent.
>The figures have been going steadily down for some
>time and should continue to do so. For poor George
>Bush is now faced with the vigil of Cindy Sheehan. She
>is a 48-year-old mother of a soldier who was killed in
>Iraq a year ago. Incensed by Bush's statement that the
>U.S. soldiers died in a "noble cause," she decided to
>go to Crawford, Texas, and ask to see the president so
>that he could explain to her for what "noble cause"
>her son died.
>
>  Of course, George W. Bush hasn't had the courage to
>see her. He sent out emissaries. She said this wasn't
>enough, that she wanted to see Bush personally. She
>has now said that she will maintain a vigil outside
>Bush's home until either he sees her or she is
>arrested. At first, the press ignored her. But now,
>other mothers of soldiers in Iraq have come to join
>her. She is getting moral support from more and more
>people who had previously supported the war. And the
>national press now has turned her into a major
>celebrity, some comparing her to Rosa Parks, the Black
>lady whose refusal to move to the back of the bus in
>Atlanta a half-century ago was the spark that
>transformed the struggle for Black rights into a
>mainstream cause.
>
>  Bush won't see her because he knows there is nothing
>that he can say to her. Seeing her is a losing
>proposition. But so is not seeing her. The pressure to withdraw from 
>Iraq is now becoming mainstream. It is not because the U.S. public 
>shares the view that the U.S. is an imperialist power in Iraq. It is 
>because there seems to be no light at the end of the tunnel.
>Or rather there is a light, the light an acerbic
>Canadian cartoonist for the Calgary Sun drew recently.
>He shows a U.S. soldier in a dark tunnel approaching
>someone to whose body is attached an array of
>explosives. The light comes from the match he is
>holding to the wick that will cause them to explode.
>In the month following the attacks in London and the
>high level of U.S. deaths in Iraq, this is the light
>that the U.S. public is beginning to see. They want
>out. Bush is caught in an insoluble dilemma. The war
>is lost.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>DEBATE mailing list
>DEBATE at lists.kabissa.org 
>http://lists.kabissa.org/mailman/listinfo/debate