Wes Clark: " it is time for us to begin to redeploy"

FrenchieCat

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Nov-30-06 12:27 AM
Original message

Wes Clark: " it is time for us to begin to redeploy"

Edited on Thu Nov-30-06 12:29 AM by FrenchieCat

Clark writes in his recent OP-Ed about the fact that Diplomatic negotiations will be required to get us out of Iraq and work towards stabilization of the region via involving the region to sit at the table with non-partisan renowned diplomats......"a consensual solution underwritten by outside guarantors".

And folks, Diplomatic negotiations will be required, whether we like it or not.

All wars ends this way, period.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2006/11/illustration_by_2.html

The right approach is a coordinated diplomatic, legal, economic and security campaign drawing upon broader dialogue in the region and intensified political work inside Iraq.

Here is how to do this:

Establish an effective, sustained shuttle diplomacy within the region.

Form a high-level interagency diplomatic team, representing the White House and secretaries of State and Defense and led by an experienced, respected diplomat.

Begin talks within Iraq, and with all its neighbors, based on a clear set of principles outlined by the team. The goal would be to seek the commitments necessary to achieve our aims inside Iraq and also advance U.S. interests in the region.

U.S. interests include dissuading Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons and its hegemonic aspirations, providing security assurances for the rapidly developing Arab Gulf states and working with our friends in the Middle East to ensure access to oil resources and regional stability.

Iraq would remain whole;
oil revenue would go to the Iraqi people based on a formula they determine;
the rights and security of individuals must be protected;
the United States would have no permanent bases in Iraq;
the covert flow of military arms and equipment into Iraq would be halted;
and the security needs of all states would be respected.

Regional dialogue needed

A permanent Gulf regional security dialogue could emerge that includes Syria and Iran, and the United States could undertake a role as regional security guarantor. Preliminary discussions should lead to a more intensive dialogue with Iran in which security assurances and nuclear programs are discussed.

In terms of diplomacy, our team would engage each state and party, solicit its views and challenge it to participate in moving forward, just as U.S. diplomat Richard Holbrooke did in the Balkans a decade ago. Next steps might include confidence-building measures, hosted discussions between factions, and perhaps one or more larger meetings to conclude firm commitments, timetables or sequence of events.

Of course there are no guarantees, but from such a dialogue should emerge a prescription for U.S. troop levels and activities consistent with our larger interests. Carrots and sticks could be employed. For instance, the factions could vow certain actions in return for U.S. assistance or troop deployments, or redeployments, and possible assistance from neighboring states.

Reaching an understanding on Iraq need not be a lengthy process, but the dialogue must be broadened in scope and participation to be effective. The aim would be a consensual solution underwritten by outside guarantors, not an imposed solution. And finally, military power would have a subordinated and supporting role.

If we don't do this right, the long term dangers are....

far-reaching effects: emboldening Iran, weakening U.S. security promises to friendly states, and even sparking military initiatives by other powers — Turkey or Iran — to deal with the resulting security vacuum. Our weakened position in Iraq also could undercut our leverage in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.

Edited to add link