US
End of combat in Iraq a huge gamble
(China Daily)
Updated: 2010-08-04 15:42
 |
Large Medium Small |
WASHINGTON - United States President Barack Obama hailed the coming end of the US combat mission in Iraq, but the gamble is huge - a wager that the war-torn country won't fall back into murderous anarchy.
And as he spoke of the need to be "humbled by the profound sacrifice" of American men and women who fought the war, Obama left out or glossed over some politically uncomfortable key facts.
That may reflect Obama's sinking poll numbers - driven by a stubborn 9.5 percent unemployment rate, an anemic economic recovery and broad anti-incumbent sentiment - with just three months remaining to congressional elections.
There is a good chance Obama's Democrats could surrender their big majority in the House and several seats in the Senate. They could even lose control of both chambers.
As an opponent to what he called "a dumb war, a rash war," in 2002, Obama also strenuously challenged the Bush administration's troop surge in 2007, which was broadly credited with pulling Iraq back from the brink of civil war.
Obama said the combat mission will end by Aug 31 "as promised and on schedule," but the pullout was, in fact, preordained by the US-Iraqi "Status of Forces Agreement" that took effect before his inauguration in January 2009.
And as Obama spoke glowingly of the end of combat, the president wisely issued a caveat - the reality in Iraqi.
The 50,000 US troops who will remain 16 more months as trainers, security forces and counter-terrorism squads still face a grave mission.
"These are dangerous tasks," Obama said. "And there are still those with bombs and bullets who will try to stop Iraq's progress. The hard truth is we have not seen the end of American sacrifice in Iraq."
Nor is there an end to tragedy for Iraqi citizens, who still are dying in terrorist shootings and bombings at a rate that belies any claim to even near normalcy seven years after former President George W. Bush ordered the invasion.
Iraq's political system remains wobbly. Nearly five months after inconclusive March 7 elections, politicians are still struggling to form a new government. The bitter political tug-of-war and ensuing power struggle have heightened worries about concerted insurgent attacks. Al-Qaida in Iraq shows signs of returning to a strength that threatens the advances made during the American troop buildup in 2007.
However, Chinese analysts on international studies believe there is no necessity for American soldiers to stay there anymore.
Yin Gang, professor with Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told China Daily on Tuesday that American troops have already withdrawn from key regions in the past month and now are only responsible for safety in the suburbs.
"They have had no combat missions for a long time," he said, "The Iraqi Security Forces are absolutely able to handle their security affairs well."
Billions of dollars have been spent to fix Iraq's antiquated electricity grid since the 2003 invasion, but many Iraqis still get power less than six hours a day - about the same or sometimes even less than they received under former leader Saddam Hussein.
At least 4,413 members of the US military have died since the invasion and nearly 32,000 have been wounded.
Given those difficult numbers, Obama sought a patriotic space for his opposition to the war, fully aware of the heavy price paid by the veterans in his audience.
"There are patriots who supported going to war, and patriots who opposed it," the president said. "But there has never been any daylight between us when it comes to supporting the more than 1 million Americans in uniform who have served in Iraq - far more than any conflict since Vietnam."
Hanging over the Aug 31 milestone in Iraq, of course, remains the difficult - some say losing - war in Afghanistan, where, Obama reminded his listeners, "al-Qaida plotted and trained to murder 3,000 innocent people on 9/11."
His job now, if Iraq doesn't fall apart again, will be to hold together faltering Democratic support for the increasingly bloody Afghanistan conflict.
In one of the more partisan periods in recent US political history, Democrat Obama finds himself relying overwhelmingly on Republicans for support in Afghanistan.
Associated Press-China Daily