"I guarantee victory in Iraq" - Which Democratic presidential candidate has the guts to say these words?
Obama, Edwards, Hillary, Dodd, et al. have all sounded the theme that the Iraq occupation or whatever you call it must end. Everyone knows it is a fiasco. Yet, that is fundamentally a negative frame. It's "cut and run," they say. It's surrender.
Dems need to flip the script. It's time for Dems to move the goalposts and be bold by guaranteeing victory in Iraq.
We will never withdraw our troops from Iraq so long as we define "victory" as "short-term stability" in Iraq. Any substantial withdrawal will necessarily result in sectarian violence, possibly even a bloodbath. These are the literal pangs of withdrawal.
We cannot achieve "victory" until our last troop comes home. That needs to be the theme, over and over again. It may sound trite, it's not the definitive timetable that some want (e.g., 2013). But unless we redefine "victory," withdrawal is politically unattainable.
The expected criticisms are as follows:
- But it's just "cut-and-run" by any other name! Expect Republican mouthpieces to guffaw - literally laugh - when you define "victory" in terms of withdrawal. Losing is winning, they will incredulously ask? Is this the Special Olympics version of warcraft, they will sneer? With a straight face and with the utmost conviction, the answer must be - "no, staying is losing. Every day we stay in Iraq, we foster dependence by the Iraqi government. Every day we stay in Iraq, we become more and more an occupying force, a hated colonizer. Every day we stay in Iraq, we undermine the very stability we hope to protect. Iraq needs a new beginning, and every day we stay in Iraq, we deny the Iraqi people their right to self-determination."
- But Al Qaeda in Iraq / Iran will fill the vaccum, they will say. Wrong - the Iraqi people will reject Al Qaeda in Iraq as well as Iranian influence. In the long run, the Iraqi people will not accept foreign occupation - that is why our troops are dying and our efforts are failing. Every day we stay, we push more and more of our friends in Iraq to the other side.
- But the short-term chaos, they will cry! There is present day chaos. It will get worse before it gets better. Our victory cannot be measured in terms of weeks and months, but years and decades. Look at the Vietnam War. The conventional wisdom is that we "lost" because we withdrew. That conventional wisdom kept us in Vietnam long past our usefulness. That conventional wisdom was wrong - today, Vietnam is a prosperous trading partner. It was right to pull our troops out of Vietnam. Our withdrawal made it possible for Vietnam to be what it is today.
- But it's just rhetoric - how can you guarantee victory if our troops aren't there? Victory is Iraqi Self-Determination. After the initial turmoil, a new regime will arise in Iraq. We will need to engage this new regime and persuade it to be more democratic, more transparent, more inclusive. We would prefer that this new regime is friendly to our national interests. We will use our economic as well as our geopolitical influence to entice the new Iraq to protect our interests. But Iraq is its own country, and if they choose to hate us, if they choose to cut off trade, so be it. Iraq is not our colony or our client-state. We will buy our oil from our allies. After all, we managed to survive all those years when Saddam was in power and under economic sanctions.
- But the "guarantee" is meaningless, they will assert! The answer? No, victory means two things: (1) full withdrawal of our troops and (2) Iraqi self-determination. Every day we stay in Iraq, the best we can achieve is some kind of stalemate.
Democrats need to present a positive vision of hope in Iraq. They need to make the affirmative case for withdrawal. That case must take the long view of what is happening in Iraq, what will happen, and what needs to happen.
That's how I see it.