Biden Op-ed

A very important op-ed from Joe Biden in the Boston Globe.

Biden I think is the smartest voice in American political discourse on Iraq. Far smarter than either the Bush Administration or the frontrunners for the Democratic nomination who at this point are all simply focused on getting out and have no thought of the aftermath (as Republicans rightly criticize them for).

Biden makes three points:

1.Congress should repeal the War Authorization of 2002 given that there were no WMDs discovered and Hussein is dead.

2.Pass a new authorization that limits the US presence to Iraqi troop training, protecting the borders, fighting any possible al-Qaeda transnational terrorist bases. All troops out by early 2008.
--I would add also a clause for making preparations a la Kenneth Pollack for humanitarian/refugee crisis that will certainly take place once the US troops begin drawdown.
These are the outlines of the Baker-Hamilton Plan.

AND
3.Begin the process of a federalized political settlement. Plan here.

--This is the key element that Biden and Gelb have offered. Roughly based on the Dayton Accords regarding the former Yugoslavia, which while far from perfect (see here) has managed to hold a peace a decade on, even with Kosovo still in flux. The new draft oil law is a step in the right direction. The Kurds will be forced to deal with the PKK (Kurdish Terrorist Organization) residing in their territory launching attacks on Turkey, so the Turks get on with accepting the coming Kirkuk referendum to the Kurds.

--What this does is does not get into the waters of cutting the funds for troops and the ignorant Murtha plan. It still puts pressure on the administration and forces them to make a decision, a decision that could evoke a real constitutional crisis. The Republicans will of course not let this come to a vote which only further isolates their party for '08. In this sense from a political point of view Biden is light years out ahead of the rest of the Dems. Biden recall began the push for a non-binding resolution which was scoffed at as ineffective, but as he notes if it was so ineffective why did/does the administration push so hard to block it?

--More importantly, it puts the argument exactly where it should be, where Baker Hamilton knew it should go.....the strategy and the goal are failures, changing tactics does not matter in that case. The Republicans have of course tried to make it all about the surge and if you don't accept the surge you are for defeat, being for the surge is being for victory. Which of course assumes that being for victory is a strategy, as if just mentally creating our own reality will make this happen. Or more practically, it assumes that the American military can win this issue without any different political option.

Biden blasts Bush & his followers from here to kingdom come (and knowing Biden he'll definitely say it again and again and again and again) on this point. Being for victory, having websites devoted to Victory does not a victory make. Biden realizes this is a sectarian conflict, civil strife, insurgency, not a traditional military army versus army affair. Hence no such victory is possible, websites and radio interviews to the contrary.

The rest of the Democrats have so stupidly fallen into Bush's trap by focusing only on getting troops out. Biden has not. Biden has offered a real alternative to the failed strategy and goal---a unified central democratically-elected non-ethnic government of Iraq. Surge or no surge Maliki is not a statesman nor a strongman. He is a partisan politician, just as if every other man in the Green Zone. Give them their slices so the bloodletting can abate. There is no buy in for the Sunnis with this central government democracy format. It's over. Only Bush has not realized this and even he is showing signs of coming around.

It goes: Goal-->Vision, End Outcome Desired
Strategy-->Policy Implemented to Achieve Said Goal
Tactics-->The Means Used to Promote the Strategy

The surge option is tactical. They are very good tactics, better than the ones we done earlier. That is for fighting an insurgency. Which is only one of the many wars going on there right now. But the strategy and the goal is unachievable. They are failures. So what will better tactics give? No supporter of the Administration has answered this question other than by saying it will be worse if we leave, which is to admit (I think) there is no answer. It will be worse for a time, that is the cost of a failed goal and strategy. That is the failure of the Bush Administration and the Republican Party--from the US side that is. Better tactics does not make a failed strategy and goal achievable.

That is why Biden is right. That is why the Democrats either get on board with what he is saying or watch Rudy be the next president of the US and enjoying controlling Congress as a consolation prize.