Shhhh, don’t tell the Democrats, but while they were waving the white flag, we may have just won the war.
And so the Battle of Iraq is to be brought to an end, in T.S. Eliot’s phrase, “not with a bang but a whimper.”
With the eyes of the world focused on the Middle East peace talks in Annapolis, Md., President Bush’s war tsar, Lieutenant General Douglas Lute, quietly announced that the American and Iraqi governments will start talks early next year to bring about an end to the allied occupation by the close of Mr. Bush’s presidency.
The negotiations will bring to a formal conclusion the U.N. Chapter 7 Security Council involvement in the occupation and administration of Iraq, and are expected to reduce the number of American troops to about 50,000 troops permanently stationed there but largely confined to barracks, from the current 164,000 forces on active duty.
“The basic message here should be clear. Iraq is increasingly able to stand on its own. That’s very good news. But it won’t have to stand alone,” General Lute yesterday told reporters in the White House.
Sounds good, huh? There’s more.
Mr. Bush and Prime Minister al-Maliki of Iraq agreed a Declaration of Principles in a teleconference yesterday, a “nonbinding pact” that set forth a “common sheet of music with which to begin the negotiations,” to be completed by July 2008, which would end with “an enduring relationship based on mutual interests,” General Lute said.
The Security Council’s current Iraqi mandate runs out at the end of next month, and the Iraqi government would like it to run one final year before the lifting of all restrictions on Iraq’s sovereignty, which were imposed after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait leading to the Gulf War in 1990.
America and Iraq will decide on a “strategic framework agreement,” a bilateral arrangement for a continuing American presence in the country, including the number of American troops to remain as a bulwark against political instability and a safeguard against continuing Al Qaeda attacks.
“The shape and size of any long-term, or longer than 2008, U.S. presence in Iraq will be a key matter for negotiation between the two parties, Iraq and the United States,” the general said. It is already planned that 20,000 American troops will leave Iraq by July 2008.
Pulling out troops. Good news. And without surrendering either. Go figure. But there’s still more.
“From the Iraqi side, the interest that they tend to talk about is that a long-term relationship with us, where we are a reliable, enduring partner with Iraq, will cause different sects inside the Iraqi political structure not to have to hedge their bet in a go-it-alone-like setting, but rather they’ll be able to bet on the reliable partnership of the United States,” he said.
“To the extent it doesn’t cause sectarian groups to have to hedge their bet independently, we’re confident that this will actually contribute to reconciliation in the long run,” he said.
The agreement in principle “signals that we will protect our interests in Iraq, alongside our Iraqi partners, and that we consider Iraq a key strategic partner, able to increasingly contribute to regional security,” the general said.
America is seeking to put its future relationship with the Iraqi government on the same bilateral basis as that of other allies in the region, with agreements on political, economic, and security measures, though the general was at pains to point out that the deal, to be negotiated by the State Department, is unrelated to the wider debate about peace in the Middle East.
A long-term relationship similar to, say, those we have with other nations in Europe, Japan, or South Korea. What an idea. Add in the fact that we have pretty much decimated Al Qaeda there, and as a result disrupted their activities in a major way worldwide, and you just know this has to be a “I coulda had a V-8″ moment for the Dems for sure.
