Graphic source: The Senlis Council
The Senlis Council, an international think-tank, released a report entitled, "Iraq: Angry Hearts and Angry Minds," that concluded that a new generation of angry young men are ripe for recruitment by Iraq's extremist groups. Tell us something we don't already know.
The study describes the American experience in Iraq as a "quagmire" despite the fact that a recent Iraqi study concluded that 2,000 Mahdi militia were killed as the Iraqi Army cleared out Sadr City and related areas.
Also in the tell us something we don't already know department should be mentioned that the U.S. realizes that a military solution alone will not solve Iraq's problems. The import of the point though is to find the magic formula. In the meantime, the U.S. has borne the brunt of the effort while, I would remind the Senlis folks, that the U.N. abandoned Iraq once the going got tough. Now Senlis would like us to believe that the international community will be capable of coming up with a new architecture of security.
I would like to know exactly what was the cost to the French, the Germans, the Italians, the Chinese, or most of the world for that matter, who would now like to waltz in with their platitudes and rosy sentiments to solve Iraq's problems.
One problem mentioned is corruption in regards to oil profits. The insurgents are the ones who benefited from the corruption and who are cheating the Iraqi people from the profits that might help them. The root of the corruption problem is to be found in the insurgents. I would like to see the Senlis folks make them go away. If they can not, in the meantime, the Coalition will be bearing the brunt of the cost.
One lamentable problem is the enormous cost and losses of the Iraqi people due to war. The Coalition is regularly taken to task for this problem. The U.S. is criticized for the loss of civilian life and the degeneration of the Iraqi quality of life. In modern, urban warfare, there are going to be lives lost, oftimes, enormous numbers of losses. The differences for civilians is that there is nothing in U.S. policy that would benefit Americans if civilians are targeted. Yet, American actions are going to result in loss of life. At the same time, for insurgent groups, civilians are legitimate targets and they lose their lives as a result. Wherever insurgent groups have taken control, such as AQ or the Taliban, the people eventually revolt against them. The Senlis study barely alludes to this fact.
Yet, one of the barriers that the Senlis group mentions, the involvement of Iraqis, occurs all the time. Whenever a civilian population harbors or does not cooperate with tracking down and eliminating insurgents, the Iraqis are voting. People have choices, and if to a greater extent, they would turn on the insurgents, which many brave Iraqis have, the Iraqis can determine their destiny to a larget extent. The possibility which democracy offers is the ability to decide amongst several options which is best for Iraqis. The Coalition offers that possibility.
The Senlis study is noble-minded but the lack of commitment on the part of the international community must be mentioned. Because the international community played politics with Iraq as well, pre-war by benefitting with cushy oil contracts, and abandoning Iraq to the insurgents while the U.S. bore the brunt of the fighting, solutions should not be accepted uncritically from the international community.
It is easy to sit on the sidelines and offer platitudes, it is more difficult to remain engaged and supply the manpower and the material to point the way towards a solution. The U.S. deserves more consideration than the study states.
Posts
