Too Much Too Late

In tonight's address to the nation, President Bush spoke more honestly and precisely than at any time in his entire presidency. Sadly, his speech raised as many troubling questions as it answered, and fell far short of the convincing rationale needed to rescue his folly in Iraq. Doubling down with a new troop surge still sounds like a solidly tragic idea.

Though his characterization of the chaos in Baghdad was refreshingly stark and honest, he made it seem like the horrific violence was a recent, post-election occurrence, which is absolutely false and misleading. Sectarian violence has been endemic in Baghdad almost from the beginning of our occupation, increasing steadily and unfettered for years. How can we trust Bush to fix this mess if we he can’t even understand or acknowledge the actual timing and history of the mess?

Also, the details of Bush’s “new” strategy included a host of things we should have been doing from the very start. Holding cleared territory. Preventing arms from entering via Iran and Syria. Using diplomacy to pressure moderates to join our effort. Very little of substance was offered tonight that we haven’t already tried before—and found lacking.

Perhaps the most troubling aspect of his strategy involved how much of it rests on the Iraqi leadership for success. According to Bush, the troop surge will “provide breathing room” for the Iraqi government to bolster its grip on security. But can we honestly believe that the Iraqi leaders will chasten their militias, forgo vengeance and set aside deep-seated tribal hatreds because we tell them to? We’ve been begging them to stop their militias for months, but things have only worsened.

Bush made it clear that this is the time for Iraq to stand up and take responsibility for its future. But he’s made the same call to action countless times before: after the elections, after the capture of Saddam, after the death of al-Zawahiri, and so on. America is sick and tired of last chances. The only leverage we have over the leadership of Iraq is our ability to leave. The timing and pace of our departure must be the final motivation for Iraq to choose civility over bloodshed.

Otherwise, it makes me wonder, yet again, if Iraq has anyone like a Muslim Martin Luther King—a courageous, high-profile leader promoting non-violent change and reconciliation. Absent such an icon, and with our troops a permanent though impotent fixture, it’s hard to see anything that might catalyze a change in their national ethos and stop a civil war.

Imagine if Bush had said, “We’ve come to the conclusion that a slow, phased withdrawal, at a timing and pace of our choosing, will give Iraqi leaders the best motivation to set their differences aside, order their minions to stop the torture and murder, and bring their nation into civility.”

Instead, his troop surge will likely only postpone the day of our departure at an even higher and more tragic cost, while doing little to alter the bloody course Iraq seems otherwise determined to follow.

- JT Compton