United States President George Bush was warned on Wednesday that his policy in Iraq was ”not working” and that to have a chance of avoiding a regional disaster he would have to repudiate much of the foreign policy he has pursued over the past six years.
In stark language, the long awaited bipartisan Iraq Study Group (ISG) called for US combat troops to be withdrawn by early 2008 in parallel with comprehensive Middle East peace negotiations that would include talks with Iran and Syria on Iraq’s future, a conference on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and a land-for-peace deal between Israel and Syria.
The Bush administration opposes talks with Tehran or Damascus, and is against putting pressure on Israel to negotiate with groups Washington sees as terrorists or sponsors of terrorism.
The White House asked for time to study the proposals and any change of course will be put off until the new Defence Secretary, Robert Gates, takes office. Gates, a former ISG member, was approved by the Senate on Wednesday night but may not take over from Donald Rumsfeld until later in the month.
Bush was non-committal in his response when he met ISG members at the White House. ”It is a report that brings some really very interesting proposals, and we will take every proposal seriously and we will act in a timely fashion,” he said, but then warned ”we probably won’t agree with every proposal”.
In its report, ”The Way Forward — A New Approach”, the ISG put forward 79 recommendations to contain a conflict that it says could end up costing the US $2-trillion. Nearly 3 000 US soldiers have been killed — 10 on the day the report was presented in four separate incidents.
Members of the panel pointed out that the war was dividing American society.
”Many Americans are understandably dissatisfied,” Lee Hamilton, the Democratic co-chairperson said. ”Our ship of state has hit rough waters. It must now chart a new way forward.”
One of the more controversial recommendations was for the Iraqi government to be presented with an ultimatum whereby political, military and economic support would be cut if it does not make more progress towards a resolution of the country’s sectarian divide.
It called for US combat troops to be reassigned as advisors to local Iraqi units or rapid reaction forces, for some to be brought home, while some would be sent to Afghanistan where the chances of ”American failure” were also increasing.
”It is critical for the US to provide political, economic and military support for Afghanistan, including resources that might become available as forces are moved from Iraq,” the report said.
The ”new diplomatic offensive” proposed by the ISG includes the creation of an Iraq ”support group” including the US, the European Union, the United Nations and Iraq’s neighbours, notably Syria and Iran. It also advocated a Middle East peace conference that would involve Israel restoring the Golan Heights to Syria in return for peace guarantees, and the reopening of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations also based on the exchange of land for peace. British Prime Minister Tony Blair is expected to join the calls for a new Middle East peace initiative when he meets Bush in Washington on Thursday.
The White House has pointed out that there are other reports in the pipeline, one from the joint chiefs of staff and another from the national security council. However, Bush will find the ISG hard to ignore, particularly if its report gains support among Republicans anxious about damage to the party’s standing.
James Baker, the Republican co-chairperson of the panel and a close ally of Bush’s father, pointed out that the report was the only approach to Iraq that enjoyed ”complete bipartisan support”.
But the report was criticised by some Iraq experts in Washington on Wednesday night, who questioned the ISG’s advocacy of potential punitive measures against the Baghdad government. ”The Study Group is threatening to weaken a weak government; good for its opponents, but bad for the US and Iraq,” argued Anthony Cordesman of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies.
Few quarrelled however, with the ISG’s description of the situation in Iraq, which it said was ”grave and deteriorating”.
”We do not know if it can be turned around,” Hamilton said. ”But we think we have an obligation to try.” The report did not lay out a fixed timetable for withdrawal but made it clear that it should take place soon.
”The primary mission of US forces in Iraq should evolve to one of supporting the Iraqi army, which would take over primary responsibility for combat operations,” the ISG said. ”By the first quarter of 2008, subject to unexpected developments in the security situation on the ground, all combat brigades not necessary for force protection could be out of Iraq.”
The White House is likely to be particularly resistant to opening a dialogue with Tehran without an Iranian pledge to halt uranium enrichment, but Baker was insistent it was essential to the panel’s blueprint. ”For 40 years, we talked to the Soviet Union, during a time when they were committed to wiping us off the face of the earth,” Baker said. ”So you talk to your enemies, not just your friends.” – Guardian Unlimited Â