All of Washington is up in arms, so to speak, over President
Bush’s revamped plans for securing the peace in Iraq and winning
the War on Terror. As usual, those doing the yapping are parsing
words the president did, and did not use, such as “surge.” And as
is also usual, they missed seeing the forest for the trees. Here
are the money lines from the president’s speech:
“In earlier operations, political and sectarian
interference prevented Iraqi and American forces from going into
neighborhoods that are home to those fueling the sectarian
violence. This time, Iraqi and American forces will have a
green light to enter those neighborhoods — and Prime Minister
Maliki has pledged that political or sectarian interference will
not be tolerated.”
In other words, bye-bye Mahdi Army. That force, led by radical
Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, was cornered by our troops back in
2004, but allowed to regroup and re-arm. But since the president’s
speech last week, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who had
previously protected al-Sadr’s group, has no choice but to go after
insurgents of every stripe or risk losing U.S. support.
In the face of this, Mahdi Army militiamen say that they will simply remain undercover
and wait “for the security plan to end.” This, however presupposes
that it will be U.S. forces — whom the rest of the world, like
Democrats in Congress, mistakenly think are controlled by popular
opinion and not a Commander in Chief determined to win — dealing
out the punishment. No, this time it will be the Iraqis who must
deal with them.
And just in case Maliki’s fellow-Shiites in the Iraqi Army are a
bit queasy about hunting down their co-religionists, a Kurdish
brigade of that force is on the way to Baghdad. And their mission, should
anyone doubt it, is clear. In the words of their commanding
general: “We are going to confront any terrorist elements or
militias. We will confront any outlaws.” This opportunity for
fierce Kurdish fighters to enter the fray has to chill the hearts
of their southern neighbors.
Also on the receiving end of U.S. attention is the second prong
of the Axis of Evil. Thought by many to be aiding insurgents like
the Mahdi Army and our other enemies, we have basically told Iran
that the jihad jig is up for them as well. Recent events have
combined to demonstrate that, just maybe, we can and will expand
the battlefield of the War on Terror to include the bad boy of
Tehran.
First off was the news that U.S. forces stormed what purported
to be an Iranian consular office in the city of Arbil, in northern
Iraq, capturing five “employees.” Next came word that we had
deployed the aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis to join
the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower in the Persian Gulf. And is
it a coincidence that a group of U.S. F-16 jet-fighters, AWACs and
tanker planes have arrived in Turkey for the “purpose of conducting
exercises with the Turkish military”?
Sometimes diplo-speak is music to the ears. Here’s how Defense
Secretary Robert Gates explained the buildup: “The Iranians clearly
believe that we are tied down in Iraq, that they have the
initiative, that they’re in a position to press us in many ways. We
are simply trying to communicate to the region that we are going to
be there for a long time.”
The hope here is that the new Sec-Def is sincerely on board with
what is starting to look like a renewed commitment by the president
to take on our enemies wherever they are, without deference to the
keenings of Congress or the laments of liberal editorial boards. It
sure looks like the Iranians believe it. According to a report on Monday (since denied by Iran):
Iran had asked Saudi Arabia, a U.S. ally, to help ease
tensions between the Islamic Republic and the United States, as
Washington held out the possibility of “engagement” with Tehran if
it changed tack in Iraq.
Further proof is a scan of recent headlines like, “Senators to
Bush: Stay Out of Iran,” and the hilariously titled, “Did the
President Declare ‘Secret War’ Against Syria and Iran?” Asked the
once and future Democratic presidential candidate, Dennis Kucinich,
“Isn’t one war enough for this president?” If it is prosecuted to
include all those who actively aid and abet our enemies, it just
might be.
