Iraq Bipartisan Policy Still Possible?!

I found myself--rather shockingly--agreeing with a recent Charles Krauthammer editorial the other day. The purpose of his piece was to buck up Republicans who were heading into yet another showdown vote on Iraq. It worked, or at least, the Republicans held together (for the most part) once again, though they know better.

Krauthammer was drawing attention to the new strategy that seems to be working in Anbar province. Broadly simplified, it consists of making deals with Sunni insurgent sheikhs who have soured on working with the madmen of Al Qaeda in Iraq. So, even though these leaders have sent their people up against our forces in the past, they agree to stop doing so and help us battle the Al Qaeda folks. Thus far, they have done so, and it seems to be working in certain areas (principally Ramadi). There's nothing really improper or immoral about it, if you allow the morality or properness of the war itself from both sides (and thus, don't criminalize the insurgents).


Krauthammer wants to give this strategy--and the surge that is somewhat necessary for its success--time to succeed elsewhere in Sunni Iraq. This actually makes some sense, for a couple other provinces (Diyala, Salahuddin, perhaps), though it is not going to "win" Iraq. "The Enemy of our Enemy" will be our friend for the Al Qaeda battles, but then it is likely to go back to duking it out with the Shiites.


Anyway, Bushite Scourge will be given a couple more months--the time pretty much everybody knew they would have, until the dreaded Petraeus Sept. 15 report (in which he will ask for a few months' more time). Then, however, will be the time for the peace initiative on a bipartisan basis. The plan will be to declare victory over Al Qaeda, progressively pull back from involvement in domestic affairs, and let the Iraqis work them out on their own timetable. Americans will focus on training, seeking out any pockets of Al Qaeda, and reduce their numbers by 50% or so before election time.


I am a contrarian on American foreign policy: my thesis is that the insistence that disputes stop at our shores is part of the reason we make/have made so many big mistakes with our diplomacy and military policy. Still, though, there is a time to come together and one such opportunity is coming up. Bush will only be swayed by a strong bipartisan consensus in Congress, and the only aspect of Iraq policy that Democrats and Republicans disagree upon is whether the Republicans are doomed to be punished once again in 2008 for their stubbornness in Iraq. At least, I think they disagree on that, but regardless of their points of view on that item, we all want the best outcome for our troops and our nation.