EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
1. Things are looking better in Iraq: insurgent attacks are down, the number of troops joining the Iraqi Security Forces is up, and Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) is on the run.
2. Iraq must be viewed for what it is: a post-conflict, post-totalitarian environment. Security is everything. Without security there will be no political progress, and with no political progress we will begin to see the emergence of a failed state run by transnational networks. The international community knows that this is in no one’s interest.
3. At the local level, politics are flourishing, as is participation in groups such as the CLC—a good sign for a nascent democracy in a post-conflict, post-tyrannical state, as it means elements of a civil society are emerging. All of this shows that Iraqis are beginning to take a stake in their own security, in their own progress, and in their own future. Leaving now would ensure these efforts crumble.
4. In their struggle for democracy, Iraqis are facing obstacles that they cannot fight alone. We must continue to build on the successes we have seen in Iraq and to encourage more progress reminding ourselves of the accountability we owe the Iraqi people in their pursuit to live in a safe, secure, and democratic Iraq.
5. There is still much work that needs to be done. The government of Nuri al-Maliki risks becoming the most problematic element, as politics at the national level must be more effective and efficient and the international community needs to firmly encourage more progress on this front while not becoming entirely discouraged by the shortcomings of the national government.
6. The international community needs to remember that walking away because things start to get a little tough or frustrating is not at all a way to establish credibility with the rest of the world.
It has been nearly a year since U.S. President George W. Bush first proposed a surge of troops and a different strategy in Iraq and things are looking better. Insurgent attacks are down, the number of troops joining the Iraqi Security Forces is up, and Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) is on the run. Anyone who denies the surge is working should do himself a favor and read the newspaper.
Those calling for an exit from Iraq, whether a rapid pull out or an incremental drawdown of troops for the sake of drawing down troops, needs to reconsider the implications such actions would have. Iraq must be viewed for what it is: a post-conflict, post-totalitarian environment. Security is everything. Without security there will be no political progress, and with no political progress we will begin to see the emergence of a failed state run by transnational networks. The international community knows that this is in no one’s interest.
The progress we are seeing in Iraq is evident in many places. Violence in Baghdad has declined. The Iraqi Security Forces are getting stronger with the number of troops increasing, especially in the Army. At the local level, we are seeing our counter-insurgency efforts at work with 70,000-80,000 former insurgents now banding together to fight terrorists and insurgents as part of the groups known as Concerned Local Citizens (CLC). At the local level, politics are flourishing, as is participation in groups such as the CLC—a good sign for a nascent democracy in a post-conflict, post-tyrannical state, as it means elements of a civil society are emerging. All of this shows that Iraqis are beginning to take a stake in their own security, in their own progress, and in their own future. The next step will be to ensure that CLC and other Sunni Awakening groups can be fully integrated into the Iraqi Security Forces so that they remain part of the cooperative effort. Leaving now would ensure these efforts crumble.
Perhaps most importantly is the fact that Iraq is democratizing at a time and place where security and international support are crucial. In their struggle for democracy, Iraqis are facing obstacles that they cannot fight alone. Transnational networks, whether AQI or insurgent groups armed, trained, and funded by Iran, are the only ones likely to benefit from coalition troop withdrawals and an exit from the scene. Instead, we must continue to build on the successes we have seen in Iraq and to encourage more progress. While some may argue we are living out Colin Powell’s “Pottery Barn” prophecy—you break it, you buy it—part of the importance of staying is the accountability we owe the Iraqi people in their pursuit to live in a safe, secure, and democratic Iraq.
In light of progress made, there is still much work that needs to be done. The government of Nuri al-Maliki risks becoming the most problematic element for increased progress in Iraq as the ineffectiveness of the national government puts the security efforts at risk and assures that impatience on the part of the international community will grow stronger. Power-sharing agreements that are far-reaching have stalled and while laws to revise de-Baathification were passed, disputes over the oil law have led to ineffective and slow disbursement of revenues. Politics at the national level must be more effective and efficient and the international community needs to firmly encourage more progress on this front while not becoming entirely discouraged by the shortcomings of the national government.
We cannot walk away from Iraq. Successes on the ground need to be sustained and the fragility of the Iraqi state needs to be considered. The Iraqi government must do its part by making political progress at the national level. In the meantime, the international community needs to remember that walking away because things start to get a little tough or frustrating is not at all a way to establish credibility with the rest of the world.
Sarah Platts is the Henry Jackson Society's Section Director for Governance, Strategy and Terrorism.