Iraq's Cruelest Month Coming Up

Next week, against a backdrop of cherry blossoms on the Potomac, we will get the latest Petraeus-Crocker production of "Blood and Sand" for an audience of the hollow men and women in both houses of Congress.

When they get here, the General and the Ambassador will no doubt give us another suave performance to explain the latest twist in the Mideast theater of the absurd--how our Iraqi lawmakers have been in Iran appealing to the head of the Revolutionary Guard, branded a terrorist organization by Congress last August, to persuade Muqtada al Sadr to order his followers to stop killing people in Baghdad and Basra.

If all this feels like being trapped in an endless Pinter play, consider the recent monologues of Andrew Cordesman, one of our most knowledgeable observers. Last summer, describing Iraq as "three dimensional chess in the dark while someone is shooting at you," he made a cautious case for starting to withdraw troops early this year. A month ago, another trip to Iraq and Afghanistan persuaded him that "these are wars that can still be won" if we stay another decade or more.

Today Cordesman describes "worrisome possibilities" that could deny us "victory" in Iraq--the cooperating Sunni tribes and militias could turn against the central government, ethnic conflicts to control territory in the north could lead to fighting in Kirkuk, Mosul and other areas and the political struggle between the dominant Shiite parties could become an armed conflict. (Could? Check the headlines.)

In 2004, as a division commander, Gen.Petraeus was asking a question to which he clearly had no answer, “Tell me how this ends.” Last year, he was telling us that "we can't shoot our way out of Iraq." No matter what he has to say now, how do we persuade him and Congress to stop sleepwalking with Bush toward the edge of another precipice?

The Rise of Al-Qaeda Iraq

In the prolixity of Gen. Petraeus this week, there is a curious emphasis on the entity, “Al-Qaeda Iraq,” which, of course, did not exist until the U.S. invaded the country.

“We face a situation that is exceedingly complex,” he had written to his troops. “Al Qaeda, associated insurgent groups, and militia extremists, some supported by Iran, continue to carry out attacks.”

"Al-Qaeda is trying to open new fronts in certain locations," Petraeus told Senators today. "They've been run out of some areas...but remain a very dangerous foe and adapting foe."

There is an echo here of Bush’s argument that we’re fighting the people there who attacked us here, which would be convincing if there had been the slightest link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda before we created the chaos that invited them to come from our great ally, Saudi Arabia, and start car-bombing our troops.

Petraeus’ emphasis on Al-Qaeda Iraq, balanced by not-quite-equal time to extremists from Iran, may be non-political, but it plays neatly into the two remaining objectives of the Bush-Cheney Administration, staying in Iraq and preparing to fight Iran.

Too bad that Congressmen didn’t ask Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker about self-fulfilling prophecies.

Checking Out al Maliki

The problem with puppet governments is that they come with strings. In Iraq, Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki keeps trying to show he’s not our man but keeps tripping over his ties to fellow Shiites and losing Sunnis who don’t trust him. Now he’s losing us, too.

President Bush is expressing “frustration,” and Ambassador Ryan Crocker is echoing him: "We do expect results, as do the Iraqi people, and our support is not a blank check." So is the No. 2 commander in Iraq, Lt. Gen Raymond Odierno, using same “blank check” expression.

The American people meanwhile are picking up a monthly tab of $9 billion dollars and 100 lost lives while the President keeps saying “if the government doesn't respond to the demands of the people, they will replace the government. That's up to the Iraqis to make that decision.”

But which Iraqis and when? As we keep coaching from the sidelines and talking about checks, blank or otherwise, how do we persuade the world we’re not pulling the strings? And if they replace al Maliki, most likely with an even more openly Shiite partisan, what happens then?

When Crocker and Gen. Petraeus give us their progress report next month, Congress will want an update on al Maliki’s checking account to go with it.

Petraeus and Crocker: No Slam Dunk

After phony patriotism failed, the last refuge of the Bush Administration in Iraq has been competence, replacing robot generals and servile ambassadors with two men of substance, David Petraeus and Ryan Crocker.

For months, Bush has kept Congress from taking action to start stopping the war by hiding behind Petraeus’ September progress report. Now, worried about what the General and Crocker will say, the Administration is trying to have them testify in private while Condoleeza Rice and Robert Gates do the public cheer-leading.

No dice, the Democrats answer. "Americans deserve an even-handed assessment of conditions in Iraq,“ House Democratic Chairman Rahm Emanuel declared, not “a snapshot from the same people who told us the mission was accomplished and the insurgency was in its last throes."

Administration’s worries are reflected in what the straight-talking Petraeus told reporters yesterday: "We know that the surge has to come to an end. I think everyone understands that, by about a year or so from now, we've got to be a good bit smaller than we are right now.”

Five years ago, Crocker was one of the authors of a State Department memo on the pitfalls of an attack. Based on long experience in Iraq, Crocker warned that an invasion could "unleash long-repressed sectarian and ethnic tensions" and that “the Sunni minority would not easily relinquish power, and that powerful neighbors such as Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia would try to move in to influence events."

If you’re still trying to sell that war, you don’t want Petraeus and Crocker to do the pitching. You need a toady like George Tenet out there to predict a slam dunk.

The Surge: Sunday Talk-Show Smokescreen

As always, the Administration provides distraction for Meet the Press and Fox, while the real news is elsewhere.

Today Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker tell Chris Wallace and Tim Russert that the Surge is working, sort of, but will take longer than planned. They promise to let us know in September.

But on CBS’ Face the Nation, we see what’s really going on when Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell says, "Most members of my conference believe the critical point to evaluate where we are is in September. Everybody anticipates there will be a new strategy...and I don't think we'll have the same level of troops that we have now."

Translation: Republicans, hearing the voters’ footsteps for ’08, will hold ranks only until fall and then head for the hills by supporting timetables for withdrawal.

Carl Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, did not rub it in, saying only, "What's required here is that the president of the United States tell them we're going to reduce those troops...we're going to begin to leave."

Petraeus and Crocker may be in no hurry, but the endangered species of Congressional Republicans is ready to take wing.

Role Reversal in Iraq

Today’s New York Times reports a “closed-door meeting” that its reporter was allowed to put on the record:

“In a Sunday afternoon discussion that mixed gentle coaxing with a sober appraisal of politics in Baghdad and Washington, the commander, Adm. William J. Fallon, told Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki that the Iraqi government should aim to complete a law on the division of oil proceeds by next month.

“Iraq’s Shiite dominated-government, Admiral Fallon added in the meeting, has consolidated power and should have the confidence to reach out to its opponents. ‘You have the power,’ Admiral Fallon said. ‘You should take the initiative.’”

Ryan C. Crocker, the American Ambassador to Iraq, was also present, but while the Admiral, our top Commander in the Middle East, was offering political counsel, there is no indication that the Ambassador was advising al-Maliki on military matters.

The Iraqis must be getting a weird impression of how democracy, American style, is supposed to work.