Anyone in need or want of a ready-made lesson on the psychosis that grips US policy toward the Middle East should check out this article in the Washington Post by Daniel Byman and Kenneth Pollack.
The article’s ominous beginning (“debate is over”) should alert the sensate that something is very wrong here … The authors contend that Iraq is now in a state of civil war and I would agree and think that no person would seriously debate that fact. In listing the causes and consequences of such a civil war, the authors attempt to patch together a forward direction for US policy in Iraq.
Unlisted, unexamined, unquestioned, however, is the role of the US occupation in contributing to civil war in Iraq. It is the proverbial 800 pound gorilla that is ignored by policy wonks in the US because such an analysis crosses political red lines. (I would add that such an analysis would also require Mr. Pollack to re-examine his defense of the invasion).
In the end, the piece will serve as the Democratic prescription for Iraq in the coming electoral battles, but ultimately it is first and foremost a defense and apology for the continued occupation of Iraq.
Quite tellingly, the authors write: “How Iraq got to this point is now an issue for historians (and perhaps for voters in 2008); what matters today is how to move forward and prepare for the tremendous risks an Iraqi civil war poses for this critical region.”
How Iraq got to this point? I guarantee you that these authors either don’t know or don’t want their readers to know … How pathetic …