Obama in Iraq, Politics or Image?

Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate for the United States Presidency, toured abroad, meeting with foreign dignitaries as if he were already seated in the oval office. We leave aside the most obvious matter: the possibility that Obama is putting the cart before the horse. What is certain is that Obama is breaking many molds in American politics. American elections always center in domestic policy, and unfortunately, difficult topics are very frequently completely put aside during campaigns. Obama is doing exactly the opposite. He also dares to speak openly about pulling out of Iraq and focusing on Afghanistan. But is such a maneuver possible? And will Obama dare to carry it out?

There is no doubt that the invasion of Iraq has been one of the biggest botched jobs in the history of the United States. However, the Americans can still win. The internal divisions in Iraq have increased chaos and violence, complicating the work of invading forces, but they’ve also impeded any coordinated national resistance from uprising. The attitude of the Shiites has been decisive in this respect. The interference of Al-Qaeda has been extremely detrimental to the insurgence because of their Anti-Shiite fanaticism and indiscriminate attacks. Their war, supposedly holy, doesn’t have a thing to do with the objectives and worries of the Sunnis.

In order to win, the rebels need massive support from the population, but the Iraqi insurgence only has ample support in certain sectors of the Sunni community that make up 20% of the country’s population, and is already very tired after 5 years of chaos. In this favorable circumstance, and thanks to their accumulated experience, American generals have the opportunity to corner the insurgency and win the war, at least for the time being.

The Americans can win, but what is certain is that they still haven’t won, and right now they are running short on supplies. If Obama rises to power and begins to withdraw troops, he is going to demand of his troops an overexertion that they are not capable of, and in so doing, will thwart the opportunity of defeating the insurgents. On the other hand, even in the most optimistic of possibilities, an American military victory would be something provisional and incomplete. They could halt the insurgency up to a point, but it is almost impossible to succeed in eradicating the parties, bands of delinquents, and local political bosses that are a plague even in theoretically peaceful regions.

Long term, the decisive factor is going to be the same in Afghanistan: the ability of the local government to manage the country. The insurgency keeps the Iraqi civil administration from functioning normally. An American military victory, even if it were temporary, would supply the Iraqi government with the opportunity to continue joining the masses through effective management. Then, public services and safety restored, with a growing economy and without U.S. troops to attack them, the embers of the Sunni insurgency will go out after their reason to exist disappears.

Unfortunately, this scenario, although perfectly feasible, is nothing more than a vain illusion. First of all, it’s still to be seen if the Americans will succeed in putting down the current insurgency. Even if they do, it won’t be something that will happen in a few months. The Iraqi government and public administration is guilty of corruption, political favoritism, and tyranny, as commonly happens in underdeveloped countries. In the near future, the insurgency could re-surge much stronger than before, or ignite many other internal conflicts between ambitious leaders and every type of religious, tribal, or political faction.

Therefore, Obama is committing himself to a policy that very likely won’t be able to go into play, even supposing that he succeeds in winning the election. In this respect, Obama is playing a very dangerous game. It’s possible that right now he obtains a certain publicity and positive image as an energetic leader who doesn’t fear facing difficult problems, but Americans tend to be provincial and local- minded. When the electoral campaign really begins, Obama will have to focus on domestic policy.

Another obstacle quite a bit more serious is the Israeli lobby, an organization that probably isn’t as powerful as many think, but that undoubtedly has immense influence. Israel doesn’t want Americans to abandon Iraq, so much so that their agents in Washington are completely opposed to any withdrawal. If the Israeli lobby throws itself in favor of Republican McCain, Obama hardly will have a chance of winning the election. He knows it, and for that reason his first statements after winning the Democratic nomination took place in one of the headquarters of AIPAC, the flagship of the Israeli lobby.

Countries begin wars when they want, but end them when they can. Neither Obama nor McCain will be able to escape this ironclad rule. Americans can’t falsely abandon Iraq, leaving a decorated pseudo-state that collapses in a few years, forcing them to return in order to evade a catastrophe. They will have to remain there for a while still and, taking into account their foreign policy during the last eight years, I have no doubt that they are getting exactly what they deserve.