Ask and ye shall receive!
Glenn Reynolds argues that the Democrats don't have a plan for Iraq. Actually, they do - and Kerry's op-ed in the Washington Post today ties all the points together into a smart, focused argument.
To be successful in Iraq, and in any war for that matter, our use of force must be tied to a political objective more complete than the ouster of a regime. To date, that has not happened in Iraq. It is time it did.
In the past week the situation in Iraq has taken a dramatic turn for the worse. While we may have differed on how we went to war, Americans of all political persuasions are united in our determination to succeed. The extremists attacking our forces should know they will not succeed in dividing America, or in sapping American resolve, or in forcing the premature withdrawal of U.S. troops. Our country is committed to help the Iraqis build a stable, peaceful and pluralistic society. No matter who is elected president in November, we will persevere in that mission.
But to maximize our chances for success, and to minimize the risk of failure, we must make full use of the assets we have. If our military commanders request more troops, we should deploy them. Progress is not possible in Iraq if people lack the security to go about the business of daily life. Yet the military alone cannot win the peace in Iraq. We need a political strategy that will work.
Over the past year the Bush administration has advanced several plans for a transition to democratic rule in Iraq. Each of those plans, after proving to be unworkable, was abandoned.
Kerry starts out strong, by reaffirming his commitment to see the Iraq reconstruction through. He hints at the rationales why Bush has failed, though this parallel WaPo article covers the critiques in more detail.
Kerry's solution is straightforward - involve the UN, maintain the US military presence with NATO in a support role, add more troops from other countries (under US command), and give reconstruction and civilian authority to the UN rather than the Pentagon. He notes pointedly that the Bush Administration has admitted failure in turning to U.N. representative Lakhdar Brahimi help shepherd the transition to self-rule, and calls on the Administration to publicly affirm their support for any plan that Brahimi proposes which gets support of Iraqi leaders.
But perhaps the most important change that needs to be made, Kerry argues, is leveling with the American people:
Increasingly, the American people are confused about our goals in Iraq, particularly why we are going it almost alone. The president must rally the country around a clear and credible goal. The challenges are significant and the costs are high. But the stakes are too great to lose the support of the American people.
That's far more important than I think even pro-war Bush supporters recognize. I myself was against war and pro-reconstruction, but I've had serious doubts that we can succeed, given how the President has seemed so completely clueless and unwilling to face responsibilities. We shall see what Bush says in his first-this-year press conference, though I fully expect more buck-passing and bland assuagements. The people need a leader who will tell them specifically what is at stake and be honest about the cost and the progress.