Iraqi President Talabani came out today, and announced triumphantly that his country would be
taking over by the end of the year:
Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said Wednesday that Iraqi forces will take over security in all of the country's 18 provinces by the end of the year. U.S. forces currently are responsible for security in all but one Iraqi province.
Iraqi leaders have said previously that their goal is to be fully in control of the country's security by the end of 2006, but Talabani's statement to reporters was the most direct on the subject.
For the last year, the Bush administration has lauded such actions as indicative of true progress and security. Let's take a look behind the Bushit...
The major assertion behind the administration's claims is that the Iraqi security forces taking over provincial 'control' indicates progress on the ground. While this may be true in the moral sense, the realities of the situation are such that, like most other stages of 'mission accomplished' with this administration, these actions are
nothing but symbolism.
With blaring trumpets and rattling drums, U.S. forces have been doggedly handing over chunks of territory to Iraqi forces. This month it was the former insurgent stronghold of Tall Afar and the entire province of Muthanna, a peaceful stretch of desert and marshland. Last month it was a 400-square-mile piece here in Iraq's dangerous Sunni Triangle.
Bush administration officials point to the transfers as a sign of progress: As large numbers of Iraqi forces take over, they say, security conditions will improve and U.S. forces can start packing up.
But so far there's been little substantive evidence of improved security for ordinary Iraqis or any signs pointing to a drawdown of U.S. forces once territory is handed over.
This sort of 'changing of the guards' has been occuring with increased fervor over the last year, as the Bush administration attempts to accelerate their plans for withdrawal. Or at least the illusion of it.
Muthanna was the first of Iraq's 18 provinces to be turned over completely to local forces. In a statement, U.S. officials said the move "demonstrates the progress Iraq is making toward self-government." But the British, Australian and Japanese troops who had been deployed in the quiet province, which has a 97% Shiite Muslim majority, had encountered little insurgent or sectarian violence. The changeover will have no effect on U.S. troop numbers.
Cichowski acknowledged that "troop reductions and the transfer of Iraqi security control are mutually exclusive."
That is the money quote, and it bears repeating by the off chance any of the MSM folks happen to be dropping by the site today:
Troop reductions and the transfer of Iraqi security control are mutually exclusive.
And more importantly, outside of the moral and public relations aspect of the transfer, there is no discernable effect on the security of the region.
There also is little evidence that Iraqi forces can fare better at improving security than the Americans. Army Maj. Gen. James Thurman, commander of the 4th Infantry Division, told reporters in mid-June that Iraqi forces had taken the lead on operations and patrols in 80% of the capital.
But Baghdad has been ravaged by bombings and assassinations. Security in the city has not improved, and even suffered a much-noted deterioration, despite a state of emergency that has throttled commercial and civic life.
U.S. and Iraqi military commanders examine the level of violence, the quality of the local government, the relations between local officials and Americans as well as the tactical and strategic abilities of the security forces in determining which areas are handed over.
But even after Iraqis take control, they remain dependent on Americans for logistics and air support. Although Iraqis might oversee the planning and implementation of front-line operations, Americans will continue to provide everything else, from canine units that search for explosives to spare parts for tanks that break down.
These transfers help foster the myth of security, but they do little to improve the lives of Iraqi citizens, and even less for the security of our troops. Want proof? Just look at the security and stability in Baghdad today under the 'control' of Iraqi security forces:
Two U.S. soldiers were killed yesterday in Baghdad, seven Shiite Muslim construction workers were gunned down and five Sunni civilians were blown up, deepening the capital's security crisis.
Shiite politicians called on the prime minister to cancel his visit to Washington to protest against Israel's attacks in Lebanon.
One U.S. soldier died in the second of two roadside bombs that exploded in East Baghdad at mid-morning. An Iraqi civilian was killed by the first blast, police said. Another U.S. soldier died last night when gunmen attacked his patrol with small-arms fire, the military said.
The seven Shiite workers were killed and two wounded when gunmen opened fire on a construction site near Baghdad International Airport, police said. Later yesterday, a mortar shell killed five civilians at a market in the mostly Sunni neighbourhood Amil in West Baghdad, police said.
The violence appeared to be part of tit-for-tat reprisal killings by Sunni and Shiite extremists that have led to a dramatic deterioration of security in the Iraqi capital.
Two rockets also blasted the heavily guarded Green Zone, which includes the U.S. and British embassies, as well as major Iraqi government offices but the U.S. military said there were no casualties.
If the Iraqi handover is going so swimmingly, why aren't we able to bring our troops home? This is the question that should be asked of Bush every time he steps in front of a microphone: If things are going so well with the Iraqi handover, why can't we decrease our troop levels?
With each passing day, and each photo-op and news conference, the Bush administration is attempting to create the illusion of progress. But the reality on the ground is that we are in no better position today than we were before we began giving the Iraqi forces 'control' over operations.
Just another example of Bushit in action.
(Originally posted at Deny My Freedom)