The Strategy of Silently Leaving Baghdad

Published in Il Foglio
(Italy) on 4 May 2009
by - (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Simone Urru. Edited by .

Edited by Robin Silberman


Analysts agree: the first 100 days of Obama’s administration passed and the new president managed well in foreign policy, the field in which his rivals in the electoral campaign had insinuated he didn’t have the necessary qualities. But nobody mentions the guest made of stone, with the squared features and the outlined eyes of the Iraqi Premier Nouri al Maliki. It seems that Baghdad has vanished from all talks and evaluations. Still, in two months, on June the 30th, Washington will withdraw fighting troops from towns, though things are not going well. The month of April, which ended yesterday, was the cruelest of the year: with the greatest number of deaths in terrorist attacks in the last thirteen months.

In Baghdad the violence level is rapidly becoming similar to that of the past: the dark ages of Al Qaida infestation from which we bailed out, thanks to the “surge” of General Petraeus – now assigned to the Afpak (Afghanistan-Pakistan) front. Two days ago two car bombs hit the Shia suburb district Sadr City, causing 41 deaths. At Mosul, in the north of the country, the situation is so precarious that there already are talks about possible exceptions to the SOFA [Status-of-Forces Agreement], the military agreement between United States and Iraq, and a delay of troops’ withdrawn.

At Ramadi, the main town of Anbar – the first region to rise against terrorists with the help of the Alliance – Sunni are now afraid. The Associated Press describes this scene: “The moment is coming when we won’t be able to help you anymore,” the captain of Marines told the local council. In response came a general grumbling of disapproval from the older men: “Things will get worse soon.”

It’s as though Obama, grilled by the economic crisis and gratified by the diplomatic difficulties in relations with Iran, Pakistan and Cuba, had chosen to silently run away: things are getting worse in Baghdad, but maybe we’ll be able to leave before being compelled to really cope with it. As if Iraq didn’t already prove that every time it’s underestimated, it can cause catastrophes.


Gli analisti concordano: sono passati i primi cento giorni dell’Amministrazione Obama e il nuovo presidente è riuscito a cavarsela bene in politica estera, proprio nel campo in cui i suoi rivali, durante la campagna elettorale, insinuavano non avesse le qualità necessarie. Però, nessuno nomina il convitato di pietra, che ha le fattezze quadrate e gli occhi abbozzati del premier iracheno Nouri al Maliki. Dai discorsi e dalle valutazioni è come se fosse svanita Baghdad. Eppure fra due mesi, il 30 giugno, Washington ha promesso di ritirare le truppe da combattimento dalle città e le cose non stanno andando affatto bene. Il mese di aprile finito ieri è stato il più crudele dell’ultimo anno, con il maggior numero di morti in attentati terroristi degli ultimi tredici mesi.

A Baghdad il livello di violenza sta facendo orribili balzi verso il passato, verso gli anni bui dell’infestazione di al Qaida da cui ci aveva tratto fuori il “surge” del generale Petraeus – ora assegnato al fronte Afpak, Afghanistan-Pakistan. Due giorni fa due autobomba hanno colpito il quartiere sciita di Sadr City, facendo altri 41 morti. A Mosul, nel nord del paese, la situazione è così incerta che già si parla di possibili eccezioni al Sofa, l’accordo militare tra Stati Uniti e Iraq e di ritardare l’uscita delle truppe. A Ramadi, capoluogo di Anbar – la regione che per prima si è ribellata ai terroristi, con l’aiuto della Coalizione – i sunniti ora hanno paura. L’Associated Press racconta questa scena: “Sta arrivando il momento in cui non potremo più fare nulla per voi”, dice il capitano dei marine al Consiglio locale; risponde un mormorio generale di disapprovazione. “Le cose stanno per virare al peggio”, commentano gli anziani.

E’ come se Obama, già pressato dalla crisi economica e appagato dalle complessità diplomatiche delle relazioni con Iran, Pakistan e Cuba, avesse scelto una strategia della chetichella: le cose a Baghdad stanno andando sempre peggio, ma forse riusciremo a guadagnare l’uscita prima di essere costretti a occuparcene sul serio. Come se l’Iraq non avesse già provato a sufficienza che ogni volta che lo si sottovaluta sa scatenare catastrofi.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Philippines: Oil, Oil, Oil — and US Defeat

Saudi Arabia: Washington and Europe… A Rupture Confirmed by War

India: Iran’s Brinkmanship and Trump’s Redline: How the Crisis Is Reshaping India’s West Asia Strategy

Lebanon: From Venezuela to Iran: US Move To Contain China and Control Resources

Topics

Ireland: Elon Musk Is Wrong about Empathy — and Irish Film Proves It

India: Iran’s Brinkmanship and Trump’s Redline: How the Crisis Is Reshaping India’s West Asia Strategy

Ghana: America’s Dual Approach: War and Diplomacy in International Relations

South Africa: Trump’s Tariffs Have Gutted Agoa’s Duty‑Free Promise

Egypt: Trump Is Fidgeting in His Chair

Australia: Defying Donald Trump and Stepping out of the Shadows, Mojtaba Khamenei Ascends

Related Articles

Italy: Trump Dressed as the Pope on White House Social Media

Italy : How To Respond to Trump’s Tariffs without Disturbing Beijing

Italy: How To Respond to the (Stupid) Tariff War

Italy: Putin’s Sly Ability To ‘Dupe’ American Presidents