- GOP hopes taking shutdown off the table with budget deal will pay dividends
- Chinese Death Star: The moon cited as the perfect launch pad for ballistic missiles
- Help wanted: Homeland Security plagued by vacancies at the top
- We are not amused: Queen’s protection officers warned to keep ‘sticky fingers’ off the royal cashews
- Unleash the crossbows: Gov. Scott Walker creates new hunting season
- Bubonic plague kills 20 in Madagascar
- G-20 diplomats fell for hacker attack promising nude photos of former French first lady Carla Bruni
- Minnesota guardsman charged with stealing private soldier data for fake IDs
- Florida appeals court rules universities can’t regulate guns
- Vladimir Putin defends Russian conservative values
BAY: Iraqi victory fallout?
Ironically, victory in Iraq could mean defeat for John McCain. Crown the lucky Barack Obama, bury the courageous Mr. McCain. What a fate for a warrior senator who has played a key leadership role in Iraq’s emerging victory.
I’ll repeat that description: “emerging victory.” Terror campaigns and insurgencies end with diminishing codas of violence.
In a recent column, I referenced the “Strategic Overwatch” video that appeared on the Internet the first week of June. “Overwatch” is a military term. At the tactical level, one soldier moves, the other “covers” him (overwatches), ready to suppress enemy fire. At the strategic level, allied nations “cover” one another.
“Strategic Overwatch” is also a term I encountered when I served in the plans section of Multi-National Corps-Iraq in 2004 - a desirable strategic condition I thought the coalition and Iraqis could achieve.
“Strategic Overwatch” is a limited victory for a United States willing to remain a reliable Iraqi ally. “Strategic Overwatch” protects the much more enthusiastic Iraqi version of victory. After his May 6, 2008, speech at Quantico, Va., I asked Iraqi Ambassador to the United Nations Hamid Al Bayati what would constitute victory for the Iraqi people. He responded viscerally, “Every day we have democracy is a victory for the Iraqi people.” How blunt. The Iraqis have earned their democracy, and we owe them a solid alliance.
The video summarizes “Strategic Overwatch” in this manner:
Assumptions: The United States is in Iraq for the long haul; Iraqi political progress continues.
Time to Develop: Could emerge by mid-to-late 2009, full-fledged by 2011.
Related Events: Iraqi Army continues to rearm and modernize; Iraq and the United States agree to a “long-range cooperation agreement” the Iraqi people see as advantageous to Iraq; … Iraq begins to attract steady and sustained private investment; members of the Arab League begin forging stronger political and economic ties with Iraq.
Effect on average Iraqi: Increased gross domestic product ultimately means a wealthier society; Iraqi neighborhoods revive; Baghdad’s business community revives, and the city’s night life returns.
Effect on region: Increased internal trouble in Iran as Iranian people object to the corrupt mullocracy and to the lack of democracy in Iran; Iraqi-Turkish relations continue to strengthen; Iraq becomes more assertive in Middle East politics and economic affairs; more Shia Arab strife occurs in Lebanon (stoked by Iran) with the goal of distracting Iraqi Shias and-or “radicalizing” Iraqi foreign policy; Jordan re-emerges as a staunch ally of Iraq.
Eight weeks after the scenario hit the Web, we should change “could emerge” to “is emerging.” Credit the Iraqis with accelerating the process. Operation Charge of the Knights (March-May 2008), which most so-called media experts immediately labeled the “Basra blunder,” demonstrated that the Iraqi army’s operational capabilities had improved and that the Maliki government could astutely turn security success into political solidification. Iraqi gains mean a significant reduction in coalition combat forces could come by late 2009, with complete Iraqi combat responsibility by late 2010.
So why the irony? Barack Obama wanted to withdraw because Harry Reid and the Democratic Party insisted we had lost. As “Strategic Overwatch” develops, the United States can begin reducing its combat role because we are winning - and “we” includes the Iraqis. Mr. McCain ought to reap the reward, but given the national media’s creampuff treatment of Mr. Obama, the next “instant truth” will be “see, we can withdraw.”
But before Mr. Obama declares peace in our time, consider the “Effect on region” paragraph. The Iraqis want an alliance. That means Washington must be prepared to back Iraq in a confrontation with Iran. We know Mr. McCain can handle that dangerous test. In the maelstrom moment when an Obama-advocated rapid military withdrawal would have devastated the Iraqis, Mr. McCain stood firm.
By Matt Kibbe
The short-term deal will assure long-term overspending
- Obama's Afghanistan experts stumped on U.S. death toll, war costs during hearing
- NAPOLITANO: A conspiracy so vast
- House pushes through two-year Ryan-Murray budget deal
- Comma on!: Twitter erupts over Obama-Castro 'marriage'
- Jane Fonda Foundation fails to make single contribution in 5 years: report
- All-out war breaks out in GOP over budget pact
- White House improvises again on patchy Obamacare rollout
- U.S. pilot scares off Iranians with 'Top Gun'-worthy stunt: 'You really ought to go home'
- Obama takes 'selfie' at Mandela's funeral service
- CARSON: Why did the founders give us the Second Amendment?
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
Born in 1930 in rural Missouri, Charles Vandegriffe, Sr., brings his time and place to the Communities.
Columns from Voices around the World talking about the events, people, politics and social issues that concern us wherever, and whoever, we are.
Chef Mary Moran discusses the food we eat, where it comes from and what it does for us.
An informed and often humorous take on the world of advertising, public relations and social media. 100% Pure. Not from concentrate.
Extraordinary day at Redskins Park
White House pets gone wild!
Let it snow