Over winter break, the president outlined a plan to send an additional 21,500 soldiers to Iraq. The aim of the plan is to secure the capital, Baghdad, and to give the Iraqi government a break from sectarian attacks. The hope is that in that time the government would develop further and reach agreements on such issues as the division of oil wealth. It is important to consider the dangers of giving up Iraq when debating the president’s new plan, as it is important to note the differences between the troop surge and old strategies.
Iraq is a very important front in the war on terror. A defeat in Iraq would mean disaster for the United States in the Middle East as a whole. Iran, recently accused of supporting Shiite militias in Iraq, would continue to exert influence after our withdrawal. This would give Iran more leverage in its pursuit of nuclear weapons. It would be able to use the combined oil wealth of its nation and Iraq to blackmail the West into inaction. They would also know that any attack by America to prevent them from developing nuclear weapons could be turned aside by forcing images of violence onto America’s television sets.
Terrorist groups would also be strengthened by a withdrawal from Iraq. The vacuum of power our exit would create would allow terrorists to form bases of operation similar to those formerly in Afghanistan. From these, they could carry out attacks on moderate governments in the region, and on the United States as well.
Because the consequences of failure are so great, a plan must be put forward to avoid failure. The Democratic plan to withdraw is a proposal to give up and fail now, rather than fight on. As long as there is a chance at success, withdrawing is irresponsible. The president’s plan asks that we try one more time to succeed rather than ensuring defeat with a withdrawal.
Some say that the president’s plan is the same old strategy that has failed in the past. That is not true; the idea of the troop surge is to secure and hold the city of Baghdad. There have been military operations to clear the city of terrorists in the past, but we’ve never had enough troops in Baghdad to prevent the terrorists from returning after the offensive is complete. The surge would change this by bringing in more American soldiers and more Iraqi divisions. Also, the troop surge came with political concessions from the Iraqi government—they will no longer obstruct military operations. Militias and death squads are now open targets for American and Iraqi forces.
With the president’s plan, we have a chance to succeed in Iraq. No one can know for sure if it will work, but it is better than the alternative of leaving the country to Iran, terrorists, and sectarian militias.
