The Baker/Hamilton Iraq Study Group report has been out for a few days now and the dust is beginning to settle. Was it worth all the hoopla? That depends on your expectations. The ISG is the creation of the traditional foreign policy Establishment. The ISG report carries both its imprimatur and its limitations. Its description of the current situation in Iraq is scathing because it is reasonably honest. As a quasi official judgment of the policy elites on Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, and the neocons, it is damning. As the roadmap we should be using to find our way out of Iraq, it is less than convincing.
The ISG report has its positives and these are:
1) It has produced an official statement that Iraq is unwinnable and that the situation there is grave and deteriorating. For most of us, this rates a Homer Simpson sized "Doh!" but in the kabuki world of Washington politics nothing that is said is said until it is said officially and according to the prescribed ritual. The ISG provides the appropriate ritual.
2) It demands a real course change, not an adaptation in tactics or language. Bush's stay the course or "I never said staying the course" staying the course policy is no longer operative.
3) It recommends talks with Syria and Iran and a return to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.
Talking should never be seen as a reward but a cost of doing business. It’s what grownups do and explains why Bush is so averse to it. As for the peace process, I hope for the best but I would note that James Baker was a major figure in the 12 years of the Reagan-Bush I Administrations and certainly had his chances then to push it if he had so wished. I would also note that a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been promised before, not for its own sake but when a President wanted to leave a legacy, start a war, or get out of one.
4) It lays the groundwork and a timetable for our withdrawal independent of what the Iraqis may or may not do.
RECOMMENDATION 21: If the Iraqi government does not make substantial progress toward the achievement of milestones on national reconciliation, security, and governance, the United States should reduce its political, military, or economic support for the Iraqi government.
RECOMMENDATION 40: The United States should not make an open-ended commitment to keep large numbers of American troops deployed in Iraq.
RECOMMENDATION 41: The United States must make it clear to the Iraqi government that the United States could carry out its plans, including planned redeployments, even if Iraq does not implement its planned changes. America's other security needs and the future of our military cannot be made hostage to the actions or inactions of the Iraqi government.
RECOMMENDATION 42: We should seek to complete the training and equipping mission by the first quarter of 2008, as stated by General George Casey on October 24, 2006.
The ISG view is that, to all intents and purposes, we should be out of Iraq by early 2008, and yes, I realize there are qualifications and caveats to this. Nevertheless, withdrawal is the key recommendation of the ISG report. Once the decision to withdraw has been made and the process begins, it becomes irrevocable and acquires a force and logic of its own. The question becomes not why should we be in Iraq but "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die there? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?"
The ISG report also has some impressive negatives. These are:
1) The failure to recognize that Iraq is in civil war,
2) That the government is inherently weak but dominated by one side in this conflict, the Shia,
3) And that the army and police are shells made up of Kurdish and Shia militias.
Having accurately described events in Iraq, the ISG has proceeded to completely misdiagnose them. The result is a list of recommendations that critics of all stripes will correctly point out has little connection to the situation on the ground in Iraq and even less chance of success. Of course, that really isn't the point. The practical effect will be de facto support of the majority Shia in their civil war with the Sunni. Even that isn't the point. Ultimately, the ISG is a mechanism for the legitimation of the principle of withdrawal. It would be nice if its recommendations made sense just as it would be nice if Bush's policies had made sense (and kept us from ever getting into Iraq) but we live in a world of political kabuki. The ISG is not important because of what it is or says but because it will hasten our departure from Iraq.
RECOMMENDATION 21: If the Iraqi government does not make substantial progress toward the achievement of milestones on national reconciliation, security, and governance, the United States should reduce its political, military, or economic support for the Iraqi government.
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Wasn’t this the name of a recent thread here? Maybe elsewere………
What’s up Hugh, didn’t realize you were promoted!
Ultimately, the ISG is a mechanism for the legitimation of the principle of withdrawal.
more likely, it is a mechanism to shift blame from those who screwed up so totally to those who try to deal with the shambles and have a rough time.
Since it is a serial story, we should have it weekly. On Saturdays. Right after Sky King.
No. It wasn’t worth the hoopla and Bush and the Israelis have already summarily rejected the two most important and salient parts of the plan in my opinion.
How about “Desperate Househusbands?”
Twisted Martini @
6
“And their Martinis?”
Whatever the intention of the ISG authors, the effect has been to allow the national press to admit that Bush’s policies in Iraq have failed. This is another breached levy around Fortress Empire.
Balrog @
7
speaking of which, TeddySanFran owes me drink from this morning. I ordered a double Limbaugh and never got it…
Nothing’s going to happen unless this regime is overthrown. And by that I mean a LOT more than just BushCo.
Power proceeds from the people who put up the money. And we didn’t elect any of them.
Elected officials are mer puppets that serve at the discretion of the powerful.
Ed*ard Teller @ 3
That was certainly what many believed would be the case: that the ISG report would give Bush an out. It’s becoming pretty clear that Bush is not looking for an out.
And I can take neither credit nor blame for the title, although it does fit the topic. I send Jane some things and she is gracious enough to post them.
citizen k @ 8
While I agree with your point, the ‘net’ effect of the ISG as regards the media and Joe Sixpack has been that the Bush Administration’s policies have been a failure.
Remember that the average American does not parse the news like we do. The soundbite has been that the current strategery has been a failure.
Beer cans are being thrown at the TV nation-wide.
Isn’t the plan to draw down to leaving about 70,000 in Iraq after 2008…only if everything goes well?
Ed*ard Teller @ 9
Duh, you spelled it wrong.
L-a-p-h-r-o-a-i-a-g.
Hugh @ #10,
maybe we’re beyond Kabuki here. Something between Noh and seppuku.
citizen k @ 8
I agree. The effect is that the ISG report moves the debate to a new level and I hope changes our course in Iraq to a course out of Iraq.
Biggest shortcoming I see in the ISG: the document was stale already, failing to take into consideration a Democratic majority that could kill both the AUMF and all funding.
But the ISG wasn’t really intended as a real roadmap; it was intended to crack open the minds, ears, mouths of the American public and allow them to think for themselves once again, to consider that we could do far better than remain in Iraq any longer than it takes to get out with the least amount of bloodshed possible.
What’s in a Limbaugh? Whiskey and meat drippings with an oxycontin?
Ed*ard Teller @ 9
Just wandering in from the last thread – I now feel like I need a shower.
That was truly disturbing, if not outright disgusting.
Ed*ard Teller @ 1
Sept 23rd- Christy titled a thread “Screw the Kabuki, Let’s Kick Some Butt”
Balrog @ 13
nah. A double Limbaugh is four viagras, six oxycontins, three ounces of dark Dominican rum, with salt on the rim. I think vaseline is used as the fixative for the salt. Never had one, but..
It is usually served by a very young man.
Ed*ard Teller @ 14
LOL!
rumi @ 12
I think once we start to withdraw a lot of these plans for staying on are going to follow apart. Remember that the Iraqi army is at the moment mostly a bunch of guys with AK-47s and little allegiance to the nation who live near to home and for whom soldiering is very much a some time thing.
I still think this fits just fine:
why am I not surprised. the ingredients to a Limbaugh have been put into moderation, where I’m sure they are being
waterboardedstirred, not shaken.Hi, again!
Great post, Hugh…
Thanks for recognizing the good and the bad of the ISG Report.
Bartcop says the Iraq situation is so bad even Lee Hamilton can’t whitewash it. That bartcop, he’s always on whitewasher Lee Hamilton’s case.
in the kabuki world of Washington politics nothing that is said is said until it is said officially and according to the prescribed ritual. The ISG provides the appropriate ritual.
Nicely said, and oh so true.
Is it now politically acceptable to
be a traitorquestion the reasons for being in Iraq?Hugh! Well done.
Ed*ard Teller @ 22
Brilliant. I’ve always heard that most oxycontin/oxycodone abusers/addicts crush and sniff the pills. Makes me wonder about the Grand Lard A** eating all those pills.
Rayne @ 16
A bill to rescind the AUMFs could and would be vetoed by Bush. It is unlikely that Republicans in the House and Senate would vote to override the veto. Funding is another issue. It would have to be handled carefully to avoid looking like Democrats were voting to leave our troops stranded. It would be possible to direct funds only for the removal of troops from Iraq. Bush might not abide by such provisions, given his penchant for signing statements and the unilateral executive.
Hugh — I believe that if the investigations make enough traction, with discoveries made available to the public on a prompt and open basis, that the Republicans will have no choice but to support the yanking of the AUMF, in numbers that are veto-proof.
There are a larger number of Republican seats at risk in 2008 than Dems; this is going to be a major wedge issue to use against them.
And I believe there will be a contest to the Constitutionality of signing statements. ONLY Congress has the authority to make laws; signing statements are tantamount to remaking laws or assuming authority that belongs only to Congress. The real question will be whether the SCOTUS as currently formulated will see it this way, or no.
atdnext @
25
Ditto.
Thank you Hugh– your post and words are much appreciated– these struck me.
another compelling Hugh-man interest story
Rayne,
with House Republicans led by John Boehner and the Senate by Mitch McConnell I think the Republicans capacity for reality avoidance is endless.
Good night friends.
Congratulations on another day of kicking ass progressive style.
citizen k @ 8
I agree.
Our feckless MSM punditry assumed that the ISG report was to “give cover” to Junya.
Instead it appears the ISG report is as Hugh indicates, a “final nail in Junya’s coffin”.
Baker wasn’t trying to bail Junya out of trouble again, but instead was officially telling him:
“Junya, you is a mighty stupid drunk ol’ frat-boy who don’t learn nothin’ from nothin’. You have well and truly fecked up this time and there ain’t nothing anybody can do to wash the stink off your shite which people around the world be smellin’ for the next 100 years. We’d bury ya’ now boy, but ain’t nobody can dig that deep. Not even in Texas.”
punaise @ 34
Better than Hugh-bris which I would imagine could be painful.
uh-oh, TRex, watertiger has got it in for you: :~)
Hugh @ 38
good to see you rise to the fore-, uhhh, front
the ISG report is a just a ruse–
“…Recommendations 62 and 63 confirm that control of Iraqi oil is a fundamental premise of Administration policy. This was denied in the first years of the war, but this week the President confirmed his belief that Islamic extremists will “gain access to vast oil reserves and use Iraq as a base to overthrow moderate governments all across the broader Middle East.” [LAT, 12-6-06]. Then James Baker revealed the interest of his longtime oil industry allies, as well as key financial and corporate interests, in an Iraq resolution favorable to their narrow interests.
Recommendation 62 says the US government should help draft an oil law that “creates a fiscal and legal framework for investment.” It further recommends that the US, in conjunction with the International Monetary Fund [IMF], should “pres Iraq to continue reducing subsidies in the energy sector…until Iraqis pay market prices for oil products…” That is, in a country besieged by civil war, bombings of infrastructure, unemployment at 50 percent levels, and the lack of necessities, the Baker Report proposes to make everyday life harder for average Iraqis so that the oil industry profits.
Recommendation 63 says the US should “assist” Iraqi leaders in privatizing the national oil industry into a “commercial enterprise” to encourage investment by the multi-national oil companies.”…
It’s still all about THE OIL.
from TROOPS OUT, OIL COMPANIES IN: THE BAKER AGENDA? BY Tom Hayden
Thanks, Hugh, great post.
Senator Hillary bravely declaims
the immoral threat of video games
When Joe Padilla was stripped of rights
blindfolded, chained, and in fog and night
and dog collars appeared in Abu Graib cells
and Afghani taxi drivers died in hell
and habeus corpus was tossed in the fires
and the CIA flew prisoners to syria and said “use the pliers”
And Sean Bell got gunned down for being black
And so up stood this triangulated hack
Profiles in Courage needs to be revised
to include the Senator who with open eyes
up to her neck in blood and lies
with Joe lieberman by her side
Took a stand of moral pride
And in a thundering crescendo
pointed the finger at Nintendo
since nobody will talk, publicly, about the recommendations in the report about nationalizing the oil- and that we won’t leave until that’s done – all the high and mighty Dems are going to get off the hook for looking like the support “change” when this report is just more of the sam – with fewer dead soldiers and permanent bases intact.
they support
okay, shit. i’ll just have another corona.
There is a glaring omission on the list of impressive negatives and that is that the ISG does not recommend that the troops be withdrawn from that slaughterhouse in Iraq until 2008, by which time perhaps between 1500 and 2000 Americans could wind up very dead for some ambiguous, less than noble cause. While it is laudable that the ISG recommends that the U.S. begin talks with Syria and Iran, the bigger priority should be in extricating those troops from that quagmire as quickly as possible.
brkily @
46
I think the place went strangely quiet soon after the ingredients for a double Limbaugh were posted.
punaise @
34
A Hugh-mongous Hugh-man interest story, no less.
OT..Neil Bush, the former most incompetent Bush, has been seen with a Russian Mobster who has ties to Chechen terrists.
http://jazz-from-hell.blogspot…..nging.html
Late Night is available for your commenting pleasure.
Nice job, Hugh, I wish I’d written this:
Ultimately, the ISG is a mechanism for the legitimation of the principle of withdrawal. It would be nice if its recommendations made sense just as it would be nice if Bush’s policies had made sense (and kept us from ever getting into Iraq) but we live in a world of political kabuki. The ISG is not important because of what it is or says but because it will hasten our departure from Iraq.
My views on this are similar, but more extreme. I actually think the “I” and the “S” in ISG are completely extraneous, that the list of recommendations was edited by a college intern, and that The Group was started expressly to get rid of Rumsfeld and Cheney. Carlyle Group vs. Halliburton Death Match, if you will. The winner gets the rights to the Sock Puppet of Destiny.
The first bridge they built was to Condi, who has something Cheney probably does not.
Erroll @ 47
I think this is where the notion of kabuki comes in. In our government things are not done simply because it would make good sense to do them. They must first follow rules that are extraneous and often make little sense at all. I blame a lot of this on the depths to which our public discourse has fallen and which the blogosphere, especially the progressive side of it, is only now elevating.
Hugh 35 — oh, I think the weapon has just been uncovered that we can use on Boehner.
His failure to take any real and constructive action about the problems uncovered during research and preparation of the Foley report is his swan song.
The investigations into Abramoff’s relations with members of Congress isn’t done, either; if memory serves, I thought that as many as 65 representatives have been implicated. Boehner’s exposed because of tribal PAC monies. Would not be shocked at all to see more come out of this that does not help Boehner.
And speaking of the 65 representatives, I think we could see more movement to the left in veto-proof numbers to save their butts if investigations turn up the heat on their backsides.
Reactions to the long-awaited Iraq Study Group report
12/8/2006 6:30:00 PM GMT
Elected officials, former military, peace activists and the public react in differing ways
By: Kevin Zeese and Liz Persson
reader comment:
“Let me tel u what millions of Iraqis died for and Bushblair regime troops are dying for. The Georgetony Iraq Study Group recommended for Iraq to privatize all its oil industry open up to international companies. The report calls for turning it over to private foreign corporate hands, a US advisor to ensure that a new national oil law is passed in Iraq to make all of this possible and that the constitution of Iraq is amended to ensure that the central government gains control of Iraq’s oil revenues. I would argue, extending the war in Iraq to ensure that US oil companies get what the Bush administration went in there for: control and greater access to Iraq’s oil, author of The Bush Agenda: Invading the World, One Economy at a Time, Antonia Juhasz. James Baker, one of the leaders of this panel has his own private interest. His family is heavily invested in the oil industry, and also Baker Botts, his law firm, is one of the key law firms representing oil companies across the United States and their activities in the Middle East. And Lawrence Eagleburger was president of Kissinger Associates, which was one of the leading multinational advising firms for advising US companies who were trying to get contracts with Saddam Hussein and get work in Iraq. And the report also says that the US government will withhold military, economic and political support of the Iraqi government, unless the Georgetony’s Iraq Study Group recommendations are met, democracynow. God cees and knows all. Peace to the world.”
new thread
Shorter ISG report: lipstick meet pig.
MargaretPOA @ 5
I am with you here. The neocons have already slammed Baker’s effort. Olmert, our only ally in the region, says “hey, we never had a problem with Saddam, don’t look at us…”. That means we have nothing to offer Syria or the Iran in negotiations for their support to lend stability to the region.
Note that the blue dog Dems went to the WH this week too. I expect they got their talking points ready to go Monday: “We won’t talk to our enemies yadda yadda yadda, Israel has a right to defend herself blah blah blah…
There is to come a concerted effort to blunt the ISG…
Bushido: meaning “Way of the warrior”, is a Japanese code of conduct and a way of life, loosely analogous to the European concept of chivalry.
Wow, I never dreamt the Japanese had a Grand Concept of Honor named after an American Crime Family.
James “The Fixer” Baker, in his capacity as a thinly veiled mob lawyer, unveiled the ISG as a ‘Face-Saving’ manuever to paper over and pave the way for a Graceful Resignation of the Field of Battle.
This is Not Cut an Run, we quit, you Can’t fire U.S.
Golly Miss Molly, it looks like the Rethuglicans want the Demos to help sweep up after the Elephant once again, and bring a Really Big Pooper Scooper.
The ISG is in place to start to shift the blame in time for 2008. The Demo candidate will be sandbagged as ‘Losing Iraq’ as sure as Truman was blamed for “Losing China” in the 50’s.
Let the Games begin again.
Note the “report” never says “complete withdrawa,l” as in permanent bases we have no intention of leaving. Also, for a more basic take on all this I suggest reading the following:
http://pierretristam.com/Bobst…..0706.htm#1
How many innocent trees gave their lives to print the ISG Report just so Bush and Cheney could ignore it?
http://www.seriouskidding.com
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.” ~Groucho Marx
The ISG report served one purpose. In it the group calls for Iraq to privatize its oil and ensure that US oil companies get the lion’s share of the money. Bremer wanted to do the same thing. IMHO the report is just an attempt to legitimize the Bush administration’s true reason for invading in the first place – control over Iraqi oil. It’s as if they just paraphrased some of the passages of PNAC’s “Rebuilding America’s Defenses.” Baker may not be a neocon per se but he’s an oil industry mouthpiece and their goals are definitely symbiotic. They don’t understand that the Iraqi resistance is not going to let that happen, regardless of who the US sets up as a puppet government. They thought it would all go as smoothly as installing the Shah in Iran, which was all about oil. Supporting the Shi’a over the Sunni will ensure that this non-civil war will go on indefinitely, using US troops to help with the killing. Just because these clowns are rich doesn’t mean they’re smart. We just have to follow the money. Each and every decision made by The Decider is about money. Period.
Never give up.