‘Losing the peace in Iraq’
President Obama announced last Friday a complete withdrawal of U.S. soldiers from Iraq by the end of the year following the failure of talks with the Iraqi government to extend the status-of-forces agreement to allow troops to stay.
While the U.S. president is presenting the pullout as the end of a war and a victory for America—hoping that bringing the troops home will provide a political boost for him—the reality is the precise opposite.
On one level, the pullout is a failure of extensive efforts by the U.S. to persuade the Iraqi government to allow it to keep several thousand troops in the country past December 31, the date when the current agreement between the two countries expires. Under pressure from Iran and pro-Iran Shiite factions, Baghdad rebuffed Washington. Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr had even threatened an all-out attack by his militia on U.S. troops if they stayed.
The withdrawal is also a strategic failure. Retired Army Gen. John M. Keane, who was instrumental in the 2007 troop surge in Iraq, calls the decision an “absolute disaster” that puts the new Iraqi government at risk of an Iranian “strangling.”
“We won the war in Iraq, and we’re now losing the peace,” he said.
For those familiar with the prophetic statements of Herbert W. Armstrong, which are rapidly being validated, such sentiment is familiar. Back in 1945, Mr. Armstrong said the “battle of the peace” was “a kind of battle we Americans don’t know.”
Iraq does not have the counterterrorism skills or defense ability to protect itself, analysts say. The Iraqis will now have to fight insurgents without U.S. military intelligence, advisers and air support.
“We should be staying there to strengthen that democracy, to let them get the kind of political gains they need to get and keep the Iranians away from strangling that country,” says General Keane. “That should be our objective, and we are walking away from that objective.”
“Strategically, it’s obvious. This is a big win for Tehran,” retired Army Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, a former deputy operations chief in Baghdad and a policymaker at the Pentagon, said. “I believe there is a lot of concern [in Gulf Arab states]. We have said one of [the] reasons for keeping American forces in Iraq was to continue a very strong signal to Iran to draw a line between Persian Iran and the rest of the region. …
“Iran has a very aggressive program inside Iraq to spread their influence.”
General Keane added, “We’re losing the peace because the number one strategic enemy we have in the region is Iran. And as a result of us pulling away from Iraq, we’re losing our influence in Iraq. And the Iranians are gaining influence in Iraq.”
Columnist Joel Hilliker wrote in February 2007, “[T]he day America pulls out [of Iraq] is the day it places a crown on Iran’s head: king of the Persian Gulf.” That day is now almost here.
