 |
| Dodd and Kennedy explain the Dodd-Kennedy Sandwich to admiring MSM. Izzat mayo on your collar, Senator? |
In Baghdad last week, I joined in a conversation with a West Point graduate who is serving in Iraq. He said, "Senator, it is nuts over here. Soldiers are being asked to do work we're not trained to do. I'm doing work that State Department people are far more prepared to do in fostering democracy, but they're not allowed to come off the bases because it's too dangerous here. It doesn't make any sense."
After spending six days in the Middle East last week - which included visits with the top leaders in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Israel - it's hard not to come to the same conclusion: Our strategy in Iraq makes no sense. It never really did. It is as bad in person as it appears on television. There are literally dozens of sects, militias, gangs, warlords, foreign terrorists and others killing one another for dozens of reasons in Iraq today, and American troops are caught in the crossfire.
Our brave men and women have done everything asked of them with great courage and honor, but searching for military solutions in Iraq today is a fool's errand. True peace and security in Iraq will not come at the end of an American gun. It will only happen to the degree that Iraq's leaders are willing to take responsibility for governing their own country and securing their own future. America's position should be clear: Iraqis must show they want a country now, or American troops should begin to withdraw.
The good news is that Iraq has leaders who can make a difference. The bad news is that the Iraqi government feels no sense of urgency. I met with the Iraqi president, prime minister and minister of defense last week - my third such visit to Iraq - and once again, I didn't hear Iraq's leaders speak of any timetable for when they will take over. As long as America is there, they can defer responsibility.
The proposal being considered by the administration to add between 15,000 and 30,000 soldiers in a "surge" of American troops will do nothing to address this issue. If anything, "surge" is a tactic in search of a strategy. How does it lead to victory? It won't solve any problems; it won't force the hands of Iraq's leaders; at best, it will simply be one more reason for delay - a delay that will be paid with American blood. That's a price our troops and our nation shouldn't be asked to pay any longer.
Instead, the president should announce in January that we will begin withdrawing and redeploying our troops - to the Syrian border, to stop the flow of terrorists; to the north of Iraq, to better train Iraqi security forces; to Qatar, to form a quick-strike force if necessary to defend our vital interests; to Afghanistan, to resume the hunt for Osama bin Laden; and for those who have already over-extended their tour of duty by one or two years - home. If the Iraqis don't demonstrate the political will to unite, we should begin this process - in consultation with our military leadership - of reducing troop levels within weeks, not months.
We should then undertake a new American policy of intense diplomatic and political engagement with the entire Middle East.
The war in Iraq has lasted longer than our involvement in World War II and left nearly 3,000 Americans dead. If continuing this sacrifice held the promise of achieving American goals, I would support it. But our presence there has become a barrier to our goals. American troops have demonstrated the courage to fight. Now, Iraq's leaders must summon the will to lead. It's the only solution that makes sense.
Sen. CHRISTOPHER J. DODD is a Democrat from Connecticut.