The Downward Spiral in Iraq


In recent weeks, the Pentagon has reiterated several times that it plans to reassign some 5000 to 10,000 US troops from their current combat roles in Iraq. According to their press releases, these troops will no longer be involved in combat but will be used instead to train Iraqi troops. What exactly does this mean? Will these US troops no longer be involved in fighting? Are they hanging up their weapons for power point presentations?

Not exactly.

In reality, this reassignment is little more than a change in terminology. You know, kind of like when your boss gives you a new title that doesn’t involve more money or more free time, just more work. In short, these troops will be killing and dying just like before, only now they’ll be doing it under the guise of instruction. The aim of this exercise is to create the pretense that Iraqis are taking over more of the combat in Iraq, thereby allowing the war makers in DC greater leeway in terms of withdrawal and redeployment.

For the Pentagon and other war makers, the ideal situation in Iraq would be this: the training of Iraqi troops will create a situation in the not too distant future whereby Iraqis can take over the most deadly missions, with US troops providing air and ground cover. Under this scenario, it will be the Iraqis taking most of the bullets, although if Vietnam is any indication, there will still be a lot of US casualties, since US troops will still be involved in combat. In the less than ideal scenario, these US advisors will be advising in name only and will in actuality still be doing most of the fighting. Obviously, which scenario plays out depends a lot on how representative the US-installed government is considered to be by the Iraqi people.

Once again, if Vietnam is any indication-and it seems to be in terms of the broader strategy being employed by the US-the Iraqi government will not be able to address the hopes and concerns of the Iraqis because of its reliance on Washington and the insurgency will become broader and even more deadly. Then, the only role that the advisors will have will be to protect their own and consequently involve themselves in the day-to-day combat in the country.

In his 2005 State of the Union address, George Bush hinted at a US exit strategy from Iraq. It’s not like he said that US troops would be back home by June or even December of this year. He did, however, seem to express the hope that the so-called elections of January 30, 2005 would somehow translate into some kind of honorable way to extricate most US troops from that country. Meanwhile, from the other side of his mouth, Mr. Bush restated that US troops would not be tied to a timetable, even if asked to provide one by the new political leaders in Baghdad. In fact, the only way the US will remove its troops from Iraq is if the people of the United States insist on it to such an extent that the people in Congress have no choice but to respond to our demands.

Right now, with many US residents fooled by the mainstream media’s presentation of the Iraqi election as being fair and representative, the war party has some time to figure out what to do next. One assumes that Bush and his Congress hope that the boasts of their man Allawi regarding the defeat of the insurgency pan out. If they did, then the US military could pull back to its system of bases in Iraq and wait for their next orders to attack. Somehow, I don’t think this is likely to happen. If previous patterns of the insurgents are any indication (and I admit one can’t honestly tell from where I sit), they are not going away and will probably begin their battle sooner rather than later.

Additionally, if the patterns of the US occupation continue, the new National Assembly will soon realize how little power it actually has, especially if it tries to establish its legitimacy outside of the parameters set by the occupation authorities. This realization will cause some of its members to throw their lot in with the occupiers. It will cause others-in fact, probably most of its members-to reject the occupation to varying degrees.

As for the general population, if they perceive that their votes were a waste of their time and energy because their electricity still doesn’t work and US troops are still breaking into their houses and arresting and killing their menfolk and whoever else gets in their way, one can expect a general radicalization. Popular demonstrations against the occupation will increase in size and frequency and the armed insurgency will grow. This time around it wouldn’t be limited to one particular segment of the populace like it seems to be today (albeit a substantial segment).

Military advisors won’t be able to step away from the combat very much should this happen. Instead, they will find themselves trying to motivate the Iraqi forces under their command and, at the least, keep those troops from either quitting or joining the other side. Should Iraq spiral downward into civil war, US advisers won’t be doing much advising either. They’ll be too busy fighting.

Whether the lines divide along religious and ethnic differences or solely around the question of those who support the US-installed regime and those who don’t, any outbreak of civil war will be violent and bloody. Since Washington has so much invested in the country and their military operations there already, the world can be pretty certain that an Iraqi civil war would mean greater US involvement, not less. After all, that oil and all it portends is still there and Washington has no intention of letting anybody have it unless they give them the go-ahead.

RON JACOBS is author of The Way the Wind Blew: a history of the Weather Underground, which is just republished by Verso. Jacobs’ essay on Big Bill Broonzy is featured in CounterPunch’s new collection on music, art and sex, Serpents in the Garden. He can be reached at: rjacobs@zoo.uvm.edu

More articles by:

Ron Jacobs is the author of Daydream Sunset: Sixties Counterculture in the Seventies published by CounterPunch Books. His latest offering is a pamphlet titled Capitalism: Is the Problem.  He lives in Vermont. He can be reached at: ronj1955@gmail.com.

December 19, 2018
Carl Boggs
Russophobia and the Specter of War
Jonathan Cook
American Public’s Backing for One-State Solution Falls on Deaf Ears
Daniel Warner
1968: The Year That Will Not Go Away
Arshad Khan
Developing Country Issues at COP24 … and a Bit of Good News for Solar Power and Carbon Capture
Kenneth Surin
Trump’s African Pivot: Another Swipe at China
Patrick Bond
South Africa Searches for a Financial Parachute, Now That a $170 Billion Foreign Debt Cliff Looms
Tom Clifford
Trade for Hostages? Trump’s New Approach to China
Binoy Kampmark
May Days in Britain
John Feffer
Globalists Really Are Ruining Your Life
John O'Kane
Drops and the Dropped: Diversity and the Midterm Elections
December 18, 2018
Charles Pierson
Where No Corn Has Grown Before: Better Living Through Climate Change?
Evaggelos Vallianatos
The Waters of American Democracy
Patrick Cockburn
Will Anger in Washington Over the Murder of Khashoggi End the War in Yemen?
George Ochenski
Trump is on the Ropes, But the Pillage of Natural Resources Continues
Farzana Versey
Tribals, Missionaries and Hindutva
Robert Hunziker
Is COP24 One More Big Bust?
David Macaray
The Truth About Nursing Homes
Nino Pagliccia
Have the Russian Military Aircrafts in Venezuela Breached the Door to “America’s Backyard”?
Paul Edwards
Make America Grate Again
David Rosnick
The Impact of OPEC on Climate Change
Binoy Kampmark
The Kosovo Blunder: Moving Towards a Standing Army
Andrew Stewart
Shine a Light for Immigration Rights in Providence
December 17, 2018
Susan Abulhawa
Marc Lamont Hill’s Detractors are the True Anti-Semites
Jake Palmer
Viktor Orban, Trump and the Populist Battle Over Public Space
Martha Rosenberg
Big Pharma Fights Proposal to Keep It From Looting Medicare
David Rosen
December 17th: International Day to End Violence against Sex Workers
Binoy Kampmark
The Case that Dare Not Speak Its Name: the Conviction of Cardinal Pell
Dave Lindorff
Making Trump and Other Climate Criminals Pay
Bill Martin
Seeing Yellow
Julian Vigo
The World Google Controls and Surveillance Capitalism
What is Neoliberalism?
James Haught
Evangelicals Vote, “Nones” Falter
Vacy Vlanza
The Australian Prime Minister’s Rapture for Jerusalem
Martin Billheimer
Late Year’s Hits for the Hanging Sock
Weekend Edition
December 14, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Andrew Levine
A Tale of Two Cities
Peter Linebaugh
The Significance of The Common Wind
Bruce E. Levine
The Ketamine Chorus: NYT Trumpets New Anti-Suicide Drug
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Fathers and Sons, Bushes and Bin Ladens
Kathy Deacon
Coffee, Social Stratification and the Retail Sector in a Small Maritime Village
Nick Pemberton
Praise For America’s Second Leading Intellectual
Robert Hunziker
The Yellow Vest Insurgency – What’s Next?
Nick Alexandrov
George H. W. Bush: Another Eulogy
Patrick Cockburn
The Yemeni Dead: Six Times Higher Than Previously Reported
Brian Cloughley
Principles and Morality Versus Cash and Profit? No Contest
Michael F. Duggan
Climate Change and the Limits of Reason