The Mother of All Turnabouts

Barack Obama is preparing a change of course in his Iraq policy. Good thing, because anything else would endanger the hard-won stability in Iraq, not to mention his credibility at home.

The bottom-line of the de-facto Democratic candidate’s first month is: Barack Obama is being as flexible as any other politician. He changes positions and loyalties whenever he deems it necessary in power politics.

The only argument remaining between Obama fans and Obama foes is whether this is a bad development or a good one. Is it despicable opportunism or an admirable sense of reality?

In any case, it’s good news for Iraq. The detailed plan Obama laid out last fall at the beginning of his campaign called for removing troops as quickly as possible. That plan no longer fits the facts on the ground where the situation has clearly improved.

If Obama sticks with his old, inflexible plan concerning troop withdrawal, he risks his credibility among conservative Democrats and those who vote a straight Democratic ticket, i.e., those upon whom he relies in November for victory at the polls. He also endangers the hard-won stability in the region and therewith also whatever foreign policy capital he has accrued and will urgently need as president.

His advisors have already signaled the first course corrections in his Iraq policy recently. In the end, he will offer the voters and the world a policy outline that will give him the greatest flexibility personally. It will also be one that will allow him to capitalize on any future improvements in the Iraq situation.

Change in Series

Obama has shown often enough that he won’t be unnecessarily shackled by a dedication to principles. He abandoned his campaign opposition to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) as well as his opposition to the controversial wiretap law. He recently developed new flexibility on the subjects of capital punishment and gun rights. He withdrew his age-old support for financing elections through the use of public funds as soon as it became apparent that private financing would bring him considerably more money than it would to his opponent John McCain.

He also renounced his radical pastor of many years – despite the fact that he declared in a celebrated speech that he could no more distance himself from Jeremiah Wright than he could from his own grandmother. Obama’s popularity hasn’t suffered yet from all that.

It’s certain that the subject of Iraq now has a completely different meaning. For Obama supporters, NAFTA, campaign contributions or Pastor Wright are nothing more than minor points. Calling for the most rapid withdrawal of troops from Iraq was, and remains, one of the centerpieces of his campaign.

It is precisely here where Obama can’t afford to distance himself from reality. He must resist falling into the “trap of excessive pessimism,” as Andrew Sullivan, prominent commentator and Obama supporter, warned a few weeks ago.

Even sharp critics of the war and the Bush administration now judge the situation in Iraq to be clearly improved over a year ago when the president, against all opposition, ordered the troop surge. “The war is lost,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at the time. Obama said it made no sense to “play babysitter for a civil war,” calling for an immediate withdrawal.

Meanwhile, the surge has almost run its course, violence has been suppressed, and there is no longer any talk of a civil war. Al-Quaeda has suffered serious defeats in Iraq and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki’s own troops have been successful against cleric Muktada al-Sadr’s militias.

Even though great risks remain, the trend has reversed. The reasons for that are many and are partly due to pure luck. But cementing the accomplishments via responsible policies can now be the goal rather than trying to find the quickest emergency exit door.

The new situation is making the rounds among voters. The media now seldom reports on Iraq. According to a new opinion poll, 45 percent of Democrats now think the trend in Iraq is improving. Seven months ago, it was only 34 percent.

Announced re-definements

Of course Obama can and will point out that he, among very few U.S. politicians, was against the Iraq war from the outset. That shows he has judgment.

McCain can and will point out that he, among very few U.S. politicians, always advocated the military strategy that is now paying off. In comparison, the Democratic candidate stands there looking like an irresponsible defeatist.

Obama has announced that he intends to visit Iraq this summer and refine his position on the war afterwards. His latest formulations give an insight as to his direction: any withdrawal from Iraq must be as responsible as Bush’s invasion was irresponsible; all decisions will be made in close accord with the commanders on the ground.

The foreseeable consequence for the election is that Obama would be snubbing those most ardent activists who, up until now, were his strongest supporters. Even the New York Times, influential voice of left-liberal America, is showing irritation with Obama’s flexibility: “We don’t want any “redefining” on these big questions. This country needs change it can believe in,” the newspaper said indignantly in its lead article on Friday.

But Obama need not be overly worried about it. He long ago secured the support of this segment of voters.