Posted on 06/13/2006 5:09:39 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -
0613dv-bush-iraq President Bush's trip to Baghdad comes at a pivotal time for the new prime minister, as he tries to convince Iraqis the country can stand on its own and end violence - if they unite behind him.
But instead of bolstering that effort, Bush's trip could push away the very Sunni Arabs Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is trying to court.
Bush and U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad have made much of the fact that al-Maliki and his national unity government are the result of three years of democratic progress. But it is an experiment in Middle Eastern civics that has cost thousands of American and Iraqi lives and arguably has been outpaced by the Sunni insurgency.
"I appreciate you recognizing that the future of the country is in your hands," Bush told al-Maliki as he came to Baghdad to congratulate the prime minister for finally assembling a Cabinet six months after parliamentary elections.
He lauded al-Maliki for bringing together Shiites, Sunni Arabs, Kurds and Christians in a government he hopes will convince insurgents of its impartiality.
"You've assembled people from all parts of your country, representing different religions, different histories and traditions. And yet the Cabinet here represents the entire Iraqi people," Bush said.
But many Iraqis are already wary of the Cabinet - assembled from second and third choices to overcome sectarian objections and bearing fingerprints of the Bush administration.
Khalilzad has often commented about the active role he played in the negotiations to form the government; many of those talks took place inside his residence.
"Bush does need to reinforce Khalilzad's efforts to produce stable political compromises, include the Sunnis, talk to the 'moderate' insurgents and prepare to appoint an inclusive body to review the constitution. U.S. pressure to reach a stable compromise between factions is critical," said Anthony Cordesman, an analyst at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Al-Maliki's political future may be bleak if he fails to convince Sunni Arabs he is not a Washington puppet and truly wants to disarm Shiite militias and death squads blamed for hundreds of killings.
Many Sunni Arab and even some Shiite political parties dismissed the visit as an attempt by Bush to associate himself with positive developments in Iraq - formation of the new government and last week's killing of al-Qaida in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Bush's political standing portends a difficult election for fellow Republicans in November's congressional elections.
"This visit carries a lot of meanings, but this visit means nothing to the Iraqi street. There will never be any benefits from such a visit and the only one to benefit from this visit is Bush himself and his troops here, not the Iraqi people," said Hassan al-Robaie, a lawmaker loyal to anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
Baghdad University political science professor Nabil Mohammed Selim said Bush's trip also was a bid to show the world that he has achieved something in Iraq.
"In fact, nothing has been achieved in Iraq, hundreds of innocent Iraqis are being killed daily because of the chaos," Selim said.
On June 28, Iraq celebrates two years since the restoration of its sovereignty. In that time it has seen some success: three governments, two elections and a referendum on a constitution.
It has also seen a catastrophic failure to restore security and, more importantly, move the country away from sectarian killing and forced relocations that threaten to divide Iraq.
In Baghdad, dozens of people are blown up, shot or beheaded by sectarian gangs every day. Islamic extremists attack liquor stores, order women not to drive and shoot men for wearing shorts.
The city of 6 million has become so dangerous that al-Maliki plans to restore security by flooding its streets with 75,000 Iraqi and American troops.
Some Sunnis think the success of the Bush visit can only be gauged on al-Maliki's ability to persuade the U.S. president to start pulling some of the 130,000 American troops from the country.
"We hope that al-Maliki persuades Bush to announce a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. forces, otherwise the visit is of no relevance to Iraqis," said Zafer al-Ani, spokesman for the Iraqi Accordance Front - the main Sunni Arab partner in al-Maliki's government.
---
Patrick Quinn is Chief of Southeast Europe News for The Associated Press and has reported frequently from Iraq since 2003.
--
Another useless cat. He heh. Maybe he hates himself and eats huge plates of garbage each day then attempts to convert it into print garbage.
Bush To Baghdad, Post To Desperation
***************************************AN EXCERPT ***************************************
June 13, 2006
George Bush paid a surprise visit to Baghdad and the newly-formed constitutional government of Iraq. Keeping the news secret until he landed in Baghdad, he delighted the new Prime Minister, who greeted him enthusiastically:
President Bush arrived in Baghdad this afternoon for a face-to-face meeting with new Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki -- an effort, the White House said, to get a clear sense of the premier's priorities and how the U.S. government could help his government succeed.The White House originally had said Bush was scheduled to be at Camp David and to hold a video-conference with Maliki this morning. Instead, without telling the Iraqi government or all but his closest advisers, the president slipped out of Washington last night and made the 11-hour trip to Baghdad International Airport, landing at 4:08 p.m. Baghdad time (8:08 a.m. EDT). ...
"Good to see you," Maliki said to the president, who was escorted by a retinue of aides, including U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalizad and the senior U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. George W. Casey Jr.
"Thanks for having me," Bush replied, before disappearing with Maliki into one of the offices. Maliki learned of Bush's visit only after his Nighthawk helicopter had landed in the Green Zone following a six-minute ride from the airport, part of the extraordinary security measures associated with the trip.
The trip has powerful symbolic and political value beyond the issues that the two leaders will debate and decide today. Bush shows that he considers Iraq and its new government important enough to take extra risks to meet them on their own ground. It shows that the US wants to work closely with the new government and that we will do what we can to normalize their stature in the community of nations. For the Iraqis, who have risked their lives to install a permanent constitutional government, it sends the message of success and recognition.
Domestically, it sends another clear message. The Bush administration has come under pressure to back away from Iraq, to declare victory with the death of Zarqawi especially and to retreat from the mission of creating a self-sufficient security force. This visit shows that Bush has no intention of doing a cut-and-run, and that he's willing to put himself in the same theater as his soldiers and Marines in order to secure a democratic future in Iraq. The President does not travel on a whim; no matter who occupies the Oval Office, a presidential visit is always meaningful, and this more than most.
The Washington Post article notes this, but gets the message wrong and a bit overly dramatic (emphasis mine):
Bush had summoned his senior advisers to Camp David this week to outline new ways to help the fledgling government. Administration officials see the success of the new government as their last best hope to stabilize the situation in Iraq.
"Last best hope" is a trite phrase that belongs on a movie poster and not in a serious newspaper. The so-called "last best hope" is the strategy that the Bush administration planned all along: the creation of a constitutional government. That has always been Plan A, so it's hard to see why Michael Abramowitz chose to paint it as some last-gasp strategy that by implication means that we've changed course in any way. It's equally difficult to understand why his editor allowed that sentence to remain in the article,
This war has afforded the American media with a number of opportunities to demonstrate their firm conviction that they are an objective system designed to discover and report the truth. Instead, they have repeatedly shown in ways small and large that they allow their personal biases to flow into their news reporting, underscoring the widespread knowledge that they ceased being objective decades ago.
See link for comments......
Chrissy Matthews had these same talking points at 1:30 this afternoon for an appearance on MSNBC.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.