Friday, December 02, 2005

Finally a Strategy for Iraq!

The White house has recently published a 35 page "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq", and Bush is now touring the country selling the new plan. The debate about its content is already raging and many of Bush's critics argue that it still contains no major course change, or a clear "exit strategy". However, most comments from the political opposition are filled with political opportunism and disregard the strategic and tactical realities on the ground in Iraq and in the international arena.

The fact is that the Strategy displays most of the features that strategists have been asking for. The big problem is obviously that the document is nearly three years late. The Strategy for Victory in Iraq is precisely the type of open and clear strategy that should have been created and published before the invasion of Iraq. Not only would such a document have given direction for the coalition forces on the ground - thereby forcing them to train and prepare for the post-conflict phase that was largely ignored. It would also have assured the sceptical world about US intentions in Iraq. Finally, and more importantly, it would have given the Iraqi people a clear indication of coalition intentions in Iraq. Although it is clearly too late to undo two and a half years of serious mismanagement of Iraq it is never too late to improve and adapt!

The aims in the new Strategy is to "help the Iraqi people build a new Iraq with a constitutional, representative government that respects civil rights and has security forces sufficient to maintain domestic order and keep Iraq from becoming a safe haven for terrorists." To achieve this end, the strategy outlines three tracks of political, security and economic strategies to pursue. Each track contains a number of objectives and directives. It therefore seems like the coalition finally has a list of clear objectives accompanied with a strategy on how to achieve them! The Strategy also displays an unprecedented candidness by stating that achieving the objectives in Iraq will take a long time, but that the coalition will not leave until the conditions allow so.

Interestingly the Strategy argues that "It is not realistic to expect a fully functioning democracy, able to defeat its enemies and peacefully reconcile generational grievances, to be in place less than three years after Saddam was finally removed from power." This begs the question what the coalition strategists were thinking three years ago?

There have been countless mistakes made in Iraq and undoing them is impossible. However, as the Strategy acknowledges, not succeeding is not an option. Too much is at stake! The Strategy for Victory in Iraq therefore serves as an important step in the right direction. Hopefully we will also see some changes on the ground in tactical behaviour that reflects this new Strategy. However, the military establishment is not as "fickle" as the strategic leadership and to learn, understand, and conform to tactical lessons after "only" three years may unfortunately be asking too much of the US military establishment. To be continued of course...

Find the complete strategy in pdf format here.

(c) Robert Egnell

7 Comments:

Blogger sevenpointman said...

You must be kidding !

35 pages of lies.

The Emperor will never say he is sorry for creating his Empire.

What follows is an exit strategy based on the Truth about Iraq:

I would love to hear your comments.
i am sure if you read it0it will blow your mind !




Howard Roberts



A Seven-point plan for an Exit Strategy in Iraq




1) A timetable for the complete withdrawal of American and British forces must be announced.
I envision the following procedure, but suitable fine-tuning can be applied by all the people involved.

A) A ceasefire should be offered by the Occupying side to representatives of both the Sunni insurgency and the Shiite community. These representatives would be guaranteed safe passage, to any meetings. The individual insurgency groups would designate who would attend.
At this meeting a written document declaring a one-month ceasefire, witnessed by a United Nations authority, will be fashioned and eventually signed. This document will be released in full, to all Iraqi newspapers, the foreign press, and the Internet.
B) US and British command will make public its withdrawal, within sixth-months of 80 % of their troops.

C) Every month, a team of United Nations observers will verify the effectiveness of the ceasefire.
All incidences on both sides will be reported.

D) Combined representative armed forces of both the Occupying nations and the insurgency organizations that agreed to the cease fire will protect the Iraqi people from actions by terrorist cells.

E) Combined representative armed forces from both the Occupying nations and the insurgency organizations will begin creating a new military and police force. Those who served, with out extenuating circumstances, in the previous Iraqi military or police, will be given the first option to serve.

F) After the second month of the ceasefire, and thereafter, in increments of 10-20% ,a total of 80% will be withdrawn, to enclaves in Qatar and Bahrain. The governments of these countries will work out a temporary land-lease housing arrangement for these troops. During the time the troops will be in these countries they will not stand down, and can be re-activated in the theater, if both the chain of the command still in Iraq, the newly formed Iraqi military, the leaders of the insurgency, and two international ombudsman (one from the Arab League, One from the United Nations), as a majority, deem it necessary.


G) One-half of those troops in enclaves will leave three-months after they arrive, for the United States or other locations, not including Iraq.

H) The other half of the troops in enclaves will leave after six-months.

I) The remaining 20 % of the Occupying troops will, during this six month interval, be used as peace-keepers, and will work with all the designated organizations, to aid in reconstruction and nation-building.


J) After four months they will be moved to enclaves in the above mentioned countries.
They will remain, still active, for two month, until their return to the States, Britain and the other involved nations.









2) At the beginning of this period the United States will file a letter with the Secretary General of the Security Council of the United Nations, making null and void all written and proscribed orders by the CPA, under R. Paul Bremer. This will be announced and duly noted.



3) At the beginning of this period all contracts signed by foreign countries will be considered in abeyance until a system of fair bidding, by both Iraqi and foreign countries, will be implemented ,by an interim Productivity and Investment Board, chosen from pertinent sectors of the Iraqi economy.
Local representatives of the 18 provinces of Iraq will put this board together, in local elections.


4) At the beginning of this period, the United Nations will declare that Iraq is a sovereign state again, and will be forming a Union of 18 autonomous regions. Each region will, with the help of international experts, and local bureaucrats, do a census as a first step toward the creation of a municipal government for all 18 provinces. After the census, a voting roll will be completed. Any group that gets a list of 15% of the names on this census will be able to nominate a slate of representatives. When all the parties have chosen their slates, a period of one-month will be allowed for campaigning.
Then in a popular election the group with the most votes will represent that province.
When the voters choose a slate, they will also be asked to choose five individual members of any of the slates.
The individuals who have the five highest vote counts will represent a National government.
This whole process, in every province, will be watched by international observers as well as the local bureaucrats.

During this process of local elections, a central governing board, made up of United Nations, election governing experts, insurgency organizations, US and British peacekeepers, and Arab league representatives, will assume the temporary duties of administering Baghdad, and the central duties of governing.

When the ninety representatives are elected they will assume the legislative duties of Iraq for two years.

Within three months the parties that have at least 15% of the representatives will nominate candidates for President and Prime Minister.

A national wide election for these offices will be held within three months from their nomination.

The President and the Vice President and the Prime Minister will choose their cabinet, after the election.


5) All debts accrued by Iraq will be rescheduled to begin payment, on the principal after one year, and on the interest after two years. If Iraq is able to handle another loan during this period she should be given a grace period of two years, from the taking of the loan, to comply with any structural adjustments.



6) The United States and the United Kingdom shall pay Iraq reparations for its invasion in the total of 120 billion dollars over a period of twenty years for damages to its infrastructure. This money can be defrayed as investment, if the return does not exceed 6.5 %.


7) During beginning period Saddam Hussein and any other prisoners who are deemed by a Council of Iraqi Judges, elected by the National representative body, as having committed crimes will be put up for trial.
The trial of Saddam Hussein will be before seven judges, chosen from this Council of Judges.
One judge, one jury, again chosen by this Council, will try all other prisoners.
All defendants will have the right to present any evidence they want, and to choose freely their own lawyers.

12/06/2005 8:45 AM  
Blogger Robert Egnell said...

Thanks for the comment! I am currenlty travelling but will respond shortly!

Robert

12/07/2005 2:10 PM  
Blogger sevenpointman said...

robert-

Thank you for your comments.

Let me address them:

The process of seize fire will be part of the overall strategy for withdrawal by the Ocuppying forces.
Lets make this very clear: these Occupying forces are the aggressors and must leave.
This war never had any justification: either on the level of international law or human logic.
The United Nations never authorized the use of force in Iraq-or was their any reason for this attack, based on threat level or on risk to American lives.
The United States has consistently, within the framework of the sanctions, been attacking Iraq from the moment Slamdunk George Tenet
convinced Bill Clinton to opt for a policy of regime change-other than the policy of death and attrition
of this 14 year embargo that killed one million Iraqis.
Given the obvious nature of aggression we must be the one to begin to rectify our deadly inhuman mistake, carried out to steal and privatize every last vestige of Iraqi freedom.
The United Nations will be implemented in several stages along the way-with the proper safeguards-as one of the international players that can help in developing a safer and better transistion to self-government.
As for your point on who we are fighting I would let the latest poll that indicates that 85% percent of all Iraqis want us out now.
Your comment that insurgents will never sit down and speak with anyone is historically inaccurate.
On many occassions in the last 30 years insurgent groups have negotiated with occupiers.
In this case their have been at least eight meetings between Iraqi interim Occupation-designated leaders and the insurgency, with U.S. military and Intelligence people present.
The iraq interim government is restricted to get rid of or even make adjustments on the CPA declarations, and given their complicity to U.S. interests they would never reach a two-thirds majority vote to augment these rules.
Iraq under my plan will be become a representative democracy-based on 18 federally autonomous states and one central government.
It will not be divided into ethnic mini-state fiefdoms-that will divide the national integrity of Iraq.
I appreciate your views.
Lets keep the dialogue going.

Howard

12/08/2005 8:05 PM  
Blogger sevenpointman said...

You should make an attempt at a comment on what I wrote about your reaction to my plan !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This would make it more thinkable.

12/10/2005 8:23 PM  
Blogger Robert Egnell said...

The discussion on why the US invaded Iraq is a long one, but saying that it was to "steal and privatize the last vestige of Iraqi freedom" is certainly an over simplification. Watch out for the worst conspiracy theorists!

That something had to be done about the oppressive regime is something almost all nations within the UN agreed upon. The debate was about the method...

Anyway, I still do not see who will sign a cease fire. These insurgents are moreover not of the same kind as the ideologically driven movements in the 20th century. The new global jihad insurgent is playing by a set of rules that we still have to figure out and understand.

However, your idea about a federal Iraq based on smaller units than the three ethnic lines I find very interesting. Might very well be a more useful model than the current one!

Robert

12/12/2005 4:35 PM  
Blogger sevenpointman said...

I agree with you that there were many reasons offered by the invaders why they went in. None of these reasons have been backed up by facts.
But the actions of the occupying forces and its corporate and ideological sponsers significantly points to developing an economic process of privatization and control of the major industries, and resources of Iraq. This is not a conspiracy theorized by nuts with unsubstantiate proof. The document trail points to this advantage of occupation.
I also agree that the oppressive regime was involved in wholesale slaughter and repression.
But we didn't give much thought to the possible consequences of putting Saddam in charge, throughout the first 10 years of his brutal regime when we supported him, and turned a blind eye to his gassing of his own people.
As for oppressive regimes that most nations need to do something about: Israel-a nation with 300 nuclear weapons-targeted many times on its neighbors-and oppressing millions of Palestinians-
this oppressive regime was called to task by more than 60 U.N. resolutions.
What did we do about them?
Sell them more weapons-and give them 5 billion in aid each year.
They buy your products-you praise us-you have no oil-you escape our wrath.
As concerning the insurgents, let me break down who they are.
Former military personal who were forced to fight for Saddam to protect his power and wealth, police who served their community-but were also used to
inforce Saddams law of the jungle, bureaucrats who received education in Iraq through their liberal social programs, teachers, activists, jihadists who see a holy cause in fighting against the United States.
All these were motivated by the Occupation of Iraq and the stealing of their jobs and their resentment to the Occupation.
Occupation creates various lines of resistence-and guerilla tactics-with the aim of putting an end to the Occupation.
Would we as Americans put up with this type of situation?
i am sure we who call these guerrilla fighters terrorists and Saddamist-like our President did just hours ago-if faced with the conditions of Occupation-would also become insurgents.
The problem with this War is not who we are fighting against-but that we are fighting, in the first place.

How's the weather in Tanzania ?

Keep the faith.

Howard

12/12/2005 9:36 PM  
Blogger sevenpointman said...

mark-

My plan does not call for using United Nations forces.
The U.N. will be facillitated for diplomacy and as an organizational aspect of the cease-fire, and the rebuilding. I would think around 50-60 personel could be used.
I want the United States to work, right now, with many international sources, to come to an agreement with the insurgency and the entire Shia community, including Muqtada Al-Sada.
U.S. forces and forces from the insurgency that agree to the process of standing-down to implement my plan, will work to stabilize Iraq.
At this moment our training of Iraqi soldiers and police has been very unsuccessful, mainly because the majority of these people were fired, and many are resisting the occupation.
In my plan these people will be reinstated, and will join the troops and police trained in the last two years, to form a confident and knowledgable defense and security network.
These same insurgency that we are going against have the skills and expertise, to be a valuable asset to their own nation.
The fear that they will take over Iraq when we have
left iraq and our enclaves, and rally around a leader or support the freeing of Saddam, to put him back in power, is very low. This is the case because my plan would aim to set safeguards and protections, and incentives, based on integrating many ethnic and political forces into a cohesive unit, that would be responsible to defending Iraq against incursion, by any foreign invasion, Western or jihadist. In order to do this, and to maintain the integrity of their results and power-base, they would be obliged not to overthrow their government, or cause chaos.
Given all these points-and the development of indigenous, and socially shared wealth, from the assets of oil, and easing of debt, and the paying of reparations, and the wise use of sustainable and fair trade and investment, economic stability within three to four years, could also inspire the military, the bureaucracts, the entrepreneurs, and the mass of iraqi people, to have pride and trust in their great nation.

Peace my friend,

Howard

12/16/2005 8:13 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home