Today’s Must ReadWhen last we left the Bush administration’s so-called benchmarks for strategic progress in Iraq — that is, the political progress that military success allows — they weren’t being met, and the White House didn’t care. Now that the year’s almost over and the administration is beginning to bring the “surge” troops home, it’s worth asking: what happened to the benchmarks? The New York Times reports that the administration has quietly given up on them, preferring nebulous goals for which it’s easier to claim success.
With American military successes outpacing political gains in Iraq, the Bush administration has lowered its expectation of quickly achieving major steps toward unifying the country, including passage of a long-stymied plan to share oil revenues and holding regional elections.
Instead, administration officials say they are focusing their immediate efforts on several more limited but achievable goals in the hope of convincing Iraqis, foreign governments and Americans that progress is being made toward the political breakthroughs that the military campaign of the past 10 months was supposed to promote.
The short-term American targets include passage of a $48 billion Iraqi budget, something the Iraqis say they are on their way to doing anyway; renewing the United Nations mandate that authorizes an American presence in the country, which the Iraqis have done repeatedly before; and passing legislation to allow thousands of Baath Party members from Saddam Husseinâs era to rejoin the government. A senior Bush administration official described that goal as largely symbolic since rehirings have been quietly taking place already.
In January, the entire point of the surge, according to President Bush, was to achieve sectarian reconciliation. The surge has had quite a few tactical successes, as would be expected with an infusion of 30,000 troops and a smarter, population-centric approach. But that’s an unfortunate footnote to a four-plus-year war — and one susceptible to reversal — without political progress, as any half-awake counterinsurgency expert can attest. And, once again, the Bush administration has substituted at least some tangible definition of success for what amounts to a PR strategy. Remember this when Bush and the 2008 GOP presidential candidates praise the surge to high heaven and castigate liberals for opposing its manifest, shining wisdom.
What’s more, while everyone was focused on Iraq, the same pattern has taken hold in Afghanistan.
A White House assessment of the war in Afghanistan has concluded that wide-ranging strategic goals that the Bush administration set for 2007 have not been met, even as U.S. and NATO forces have scored significant combat successes against resurgent Taliban fighters, according to U.S. officials.
The evaluation this month by the National Security Council followed an in-depth review in late 2006 that laid out a series of projected improvements for this year, including progress in security, governance and the economy. But the latest assessment concluded that only “the kinetic piece” — individual battles against Taliban fighters — has shown substantial progress, while improvements in the other areas continue to lag, a senior administration official said.
This judgment reflects sharp differences between U.S. military and intelligence officials on where the Afghan war is headed. Intelligence analysts acknowledge the battlefield victories, but they highlight the Taliban’s unchallenged expansion into new territory, an increase in opium poppy cultivation and the weakness of the government of President Hamid Karzai as signs that the war effort is deteriorating.
It should be surprising that military officials, who should have institutional knowledge of an earlier war in which all the battles were won and the greater conflict lost, still conflate tactical success with strategic victory. But it all makes sense if the greater imperative is to avoid admitting a war is lost for domestic political reasons.
But even as a PR strategy, the Bush administration’s push to trumpet minor advances as heralds of the inexorable, forthcoming victory is sure to hit some snags. Consider the de-debaathification effort, highlighted in the Times piece as one of Bush’s post-benchmark benchmarks.
Reforms that would ease curbs on former members of Saddam Hussein’s Baath Party rejoining Iraq’s civil service and military appeared headed for legislative gridlock after attempts Sunday to read a draft bill in parliament disintegrated into yelling and finger-pointing.
It was the first time that Iraqi lawmakers had taken up any of the so-called major benchmarks that Washington has deemed crucial for the long-term cessation of sectarian violence and national reconciliation.
Squint hard enough and it kind of sort of maybe looks like victory.
