Over the summer, President George W. Bush committed over 20,000 new troops to Iraq to stabilize the region. On September 10th 2007, General David Petraeus, head of military action in Iraq, briefed Congress with some mixed reviews, but overall optimism. According to his report, the troop surge decreased sectarian violence by 45% since its height last December, with ethno-sectarian deaths down 55% (down 80% in Baghdad) since last September, IED attacks declining 33%, and car bombings and suicide attacks down 49%.
Despite his statistics, a recent poll cosponsored by ABC News, BBC, and the Japanese broadcaster NHK, shows that 61% of Iraqis say security control has worsened, with 28% claiming it stayed the same, and 11% saying it improved
An independent report by the Government Accountability Office set up by Congress paints a much grimmer picture. According to the report, Iraq has only met three, and partially met four, of the 18 benchmarks
"Overall key legislation has not been passed, violence remains high, and it is unclear whether the Iraqi government will spend $10 billion in reconstruction funds," said the GAO chief, U.S. Comptroller David Walke.
Retired USMC General James Jones, coauthor of the report, said, "[We need] the ability of a government to achieve genuine national reconciliation, which will solve a lot of the internal problems."
The White House was critical of the GAO report, as White House deputy press secretary Dana Perino said, "A bar was set so high, that it was almost not to be able to be met."
The troop surge argument that there needs to be security in Iraq in order to have political reconciliation, and the GAO report's argument that there needs to be political reconciliation in Iraq in order to have security, has made the Iraq War the chicken and egg issue of the 21st century. Whether countries find physical stability or political stability first in order to provide a functioning democracy has been the philosophical argument that has encompassed this war, with Iraq as the guinea pig.
So what of the future? Petraeus plans to withdraw 30,000 troops by nextJuly. However, America's overall mission in Iraq has been rather murky. On December 13th 2006, Bush said that the administration wanted "an Iraq that can govern sustain and defend itself." But on Febuary 14th, 2007, Bush claimed success in Iraq would mean a "society in which there is relative peace. I said relative peace, because if it's like zero car bombings, it'll never happen that way." But then on May 1st, 2007, Bush said, "And the definition of success as I described is sectarian violence down. Success is not no violence."
Overall, the success of the troop surge is still debated over with government reports that contradict each other in terms of success. Amid pro-Iraq War politicians siding with Petraeus, and anti-Iraq War politicians siding with the GAO report, Iraq went from an issue of military and diplomatic strategy, to an issue of political advantage and blah blah blah I doubt anybody got this far.
PS- George Bush, or George "Tush"? I bet Congress will get mad at me now!
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
