After June 30 (2004) , what next in Iraq?
***********************************AN EXCERPT***********************
United Press International
Washington, DC, Jun. 22 (UPI) -- In less than a week Iraq will reclaim its sovereignty, but this does not mean the end of U.S. involvement. Like it or not, the United States is stuck there for years, and will continue to feel the burden of its actions.
Daniel P. Serwer, Director of Peace and Stability Operations at the United States Institute of Peace, told United Press International that the U.S. campaign in Iraq has been marked by "too little planning, too little experience and knowledge of local situations, too little attention to security issues. Maybe a bit too much money, maybe a bit too much talking and not enough listening."
Newsweek writer Eleanor Clift, in a phone interview, characterized the U.S. occupation in Iraq as "a dismal failure."
Brookings Institute foreign policy scholar Michael O'Hanlon is not particularly optimistic either. In a paper written for a June 16 conference on the U.S. in Iraq, he stated that the security situation and Iraqi attitudes toward America are "simply not promising."
"We must view Iraq as a genuine strategic crisis of our day, not just a problem that can be solved with a little more patience and a few more resources, as much recent Bush administration commentary would seem to suggest," said O'Hanlon.
Serwer told UPI that Iraq is better off now than it was a year ago. But the country's fragile situation requires the United States to remain there at least until the new government is established and Iraqi security is tighter.
"The new government needs protection, and doesn't have anyone to give it to them," he said. "This is a fundamental problem of the future."
Security is the most important issue for Iraqis -- even more so than the economy, said Jeremy Rosner, senior vice president of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research Inc. and former senior staffer in the National Security Council during the Clinton administration.
"We're being looked to as the primary way to sustain a secure environment," he said in a phone interview. Pulling out of Iraq is an option favored by a slim minority of Americans at this point, the pollster said.
If the role of the United States in Iraq all comes down to security, how will this "fundamental problem" be solved? What is the role of the United States now, and what will it be after June 30?
"We need to be guarantors that whatever constitution is enacted would be followed," American Enterprise Institute scholar Michael Rubin told UPI. "Our goal should be to make sure that Iraq stays secure from external enemies and, at the same time, that no general with a gun takes over the government."
When asked how long the United States should remain in Iraq, Rubin defined "how long" two different ways: the amount of time U.S. troops should occupy the state ("as short as possible"), and the amount of time the United States should remain in Iraq in a non-military capacity ("I think we're talking years").
**********************************************
See link for the rest of the article.....brings back memories.....MSM still talking the same game!