NYT: Another Grim Week in Iraq

[babylonsister]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/10/opinion/10sat1.html

Another Grim Week in Iraq


Published: March 10, 2007

On Sunday in Basra, British troops stormed an Iraqi intelligence office and found about 30 prisoners, some of them tortured. Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki was outraged — not at the torture, but at the raid that halted it. Soon British troops will be leaving Basra, leaving Mr. Maliki and his security forces free to do as they please.

On Monday in Baghdad, a suicide bomber attacked a row of bookstores, killing 20 people. The White House insists that Baghdad is growing more secure, as the extra infusion of American troops ordered by President Bush begins to take up positions in threatened neighborhoods. And on it went. On Tuesday, sectarian attacks killed at least 118 Shiite pilgrims. Then on Thursday, The Times reported that the day-to-day commander of American forces in Iraq, Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, was recommending that those extra 21,500 combat troops — plus the 7,000 support troops Mr. Bush somehow forgot to mention — stay on into next year. On the same day, General Odierno’s boss, Gen. David Petraeus, said that even more American troops could be needed in the near future.

Anyone who wanted to believe that all Mr. Bush was seeking was a short-term security push — as part of a larger strategy to extricate American troops from this unwinnable war — now needs to face up to a far less palatable reality. What is under way is a significant and long-term escalation. The Army cannot sustain these levels for more than another few months. And as long as Iraq’s leaders refuse to make significant political changes, the civil war will continue to spin out of control.

With this backdrop, it is somewhat reassuring to see Congressional Democrats getting a little smarter in their gathering efforts to force a policy change. They are still talking about a phased withdrawal and an arbitrary exit date. That’s an approach we’ve never favored without a parallel political strategy to try to contain the chaos and regional strife that are likely to follow. What they can usefully do, and are attempting, is to use the power of the purse constructively to force the White House to give American troops the kind of support they need and to demand some sanity from Iraq’s leaders.

Rather than trying to challenge the administration’s request for $100 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan, House Democrats now want to add funds to speed the production and delivery of badly needed protective armor, provide better medical care for wounded troops and veterans, and shore up the Army’s eroding combat readiness.

A supplemental financing bill amended this way would be hard for senators to vote against or for Mr. Bush to veto. House Democrats also want to make it a vehicle for prodding the White House into imposing benchmarks and timetables on an Iraqi government that still refuses to purge its security forces of sectarian thugs and reach out to the country’s Sunni Arab minority. We hope they succeed.

In what may have been this week’s only good news out of Iraq, a growing number of parliamentarians have begun challenging Prime Minister Maliki’s destructive policies. There is talk about forming a political bloc that would cross rather than reinforce the sectarian divide. If the White House won’t demand more from Mr. Maliki, Congressionally enacted benchmarks could help empower Iraq’s more moderate politicians. Without a more enlightened Iraqi government — and a tougher policy from Washington — next week, and the weeks and months to come, will be no better than the last.

[Monkeyman]

1. Its just going to get worse