(HOST) As the divide over Iraq between the White House and the Congress grows ever more rancorous, commentator Barrie Dunsmore examines what, for many Americans, is the great dilemma of deciding what policy to support.
(DUNSMORE) To withdraw or not to withdraw. That is the question. Is it nobler to recognize that by invading Iraq and mismanaging the four years of occupation, the United States still has a moral obligation to the Iraqi people to try to give them a semblance of political stability and security? Or has the situation so descended into the hell of anarchy and civil war that the departure of American combat forces would be best for all concerned?
It may well be a moral question – but it will ultimately be resolved by politics. By politics I don’t mean some unworthy partisan maneuverings, but the will of the people in a democracy. Right now, there is no doubt that the majority of Americans believe the invasion of Iraq was a monumental blunder which has cost their country more in lives and money than they could ever have imagined. In principle, this majority wants the war to end soon. It sent that message in last November’s election when it put the Democratic Party in charge of both the House and the Senate.
That is what is driving the Democratic leaders of Congress in their efforts to attach withdrawal dates as a condition for continued funding of the war. In effect, this is what they were elected to do.
But many millions of Americans, and they aren’t all Republicans, are also uneasy about just how and when this country’s involvement should be brought to an end. They don’t want it to be dishonorable, and they are certainly opposed to any measures that would further endanger U.S. forces on the ground. They also worry that a precipitate American departure would further embolden Islamic terrorists such as al-Qaeda.
President George W. Bush is aiming directly at those fears with his rhetoric of recent days. He has the power to veto any deadlines set by Congress. And with the legacy of his presidency at stake, Mr. Bush seems determined not to withdraw during his time in office.
But the status quo is not the only option. While America’s top generals continue to say that Iraq cannot be solved militarily – almost nothing is being done politically and diplomatically. Laws have been drafted to give each Iraqi sect a fair share of their country’s oil revenues – and to ease restrictions on former members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party. Both would ease sectarian conflict, but neither issue appears to have sufficient support in the Iraqi parliament to be enacted.
The option of using diplomacy to get its neighbors to help stabilize Iraq hasn’t gone beyond one low-level meeting. And the Bush administration has done virtually nothing to energize this process – even though every one of the neighbors will be hurt if Iraq explodes and becomes a failed state.
In the meantime, significant numbers of the combatants in Iraq’s complex civil conflict now consider the United States their enemy. That said, and with no sincere political efforts underway, American combat troops serve no purpose being there.
Barrie Dunsmore is a veteran diplomatic and foreign correspondent for ABC News, now living in Charlotte.