- Obama military downsizing leaves U.S. too weak to counter global threats, panel finds
- Sen. Tom Coburn vows to slow down budget-busting bills ahead of recess
- Obama fantasizes about more executive power, signs new order on federal contractors
- Clintons call Klein, Halper, Kessler ‘a Hat Trick of despicable actors’: report
- Boehner accuses Obama of ‘legacy of lawlessness’
- Pro-marijuana group claims responsibility for Brooklyn Bridge flag swap
- Young adults shun Obamacare mostly due to cost: survey
- Stabbing attack on transgender girl, 15, was ‘bias motivated,’ police say
- LGBT adults still lean overwhelmingly toward Democratic Party
- Lawmakers rattled by Syria genocide horrors, call on Obama to act
Iraq’s plight imperils goals of U.S.
Violence since American forces left illustrates there remains ‘unfinished business’
Question of the Day
Iraq’s troubled start to life without U.S. forces calls into question the Obama administration’s assertion that it has wound down America’s long war responsibly: at least 78 killed in blasts across the country in a single day last week, a protracted political crisis with no end in sight, top political leaders accusing each other of monstrous criminality.
An extension of the costly and unpopular deployment of U.S. troops to Iraq may have only temporarily suppressed some of the tensions, but the heightened violence and political dysfunction illustrate the unfinished business the United States has left behind in Iraq.
Nine years after U.S. proponents of intervention predicted a cakewalk, a welcome mat and Iraqis singing and flying kites in a shining example of democracy for the Arab world, the U.S. is still struggling to finish the job.
It is unclear how much more help Iraq wants. Last month’s send-off of the last U.S. soldiers was followed inauspiciously by Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ordering an arrest warrant for the country’s highest-ranking Sunni official, threatening to exclude the rival sect’s main political party from his government and warning of “rivers of blood” if Sunnis seek an autonomous region.
The Obama administration is defending the military withdrawal from Iraq, after the two countries were unable to agree on whether U.S. troops should be granted legal immunity.
Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said in an interview on Sunday that “periodic acts of violence” in Iraq, like those seen recently, are not new and that the thousands of U.S. civilians working there can be safe under Iraqi protection.
“We’re confident that we have an Iraqi government and an Iraqi security force that is capable of dealing with the security threats that are there now,” Mr. Panetta said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.”
But President Obama’s decision is being attacked by critics during an election year.
“In all due respect, Iraq is unraveling. It’s unraveling because we did not keep residual forces there,” said Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Mr. McCain also spoke on CBS.
Leading U.S. efforts, the State Department got $6.2 billion in Iraq funds for the year. Some $3.8 billion is for the department’s operations, including for the deployment of several hundred diplomats, civil service experts and specialists in fields from agriculture and commerce to health and education.
Hundreds more are needed for management, logistics and security support in a land still wracked by violence. Thousands of security contractors also are being employed.
The Defense Department got an additional $11 billion to wrap up military operations and fund a leftover contingent of advisers and officials.
The total is a small amount against the backdrop of $1.3 trillion spent on Afghanistan and Iraq over the last decade. Yet it belies any notion that the U.S. and Iraq can easily or cheaply “normalize” a relationship that has more often than not been nonexistent over the last four decades.
In Baghdad, the Vatican-sized U.S. Embassy stands like a city within a city, a reminder of the previous administration’s ambitious vision of an ironclad U.S.-Iraqi alliance based on shared interests, peace and democracy.
By far the biggest such U.S. outpost overseas and costing several hundred million dollars, the danger is it ends up being a symbol of U.S. isolation, its diplomats ensconced safely inside but unable to influence events beyond the fortress walls.
TWT Video Picks
Both parties recognize the Democrats' scam
- Inside the Ring: Israel surprised by Hamas tunnel network
- CRUZ: A tale of two hospitals: One in Israel, one in Gaza
- Chicken pox outbreak puts illegal immigrant facility on lockdown
- Sarah Palin's online channel hits snag as Stephen Colbert buys similar URL
- Obama military strategy too weak for future security, panel reports
- CIA admits improperly hacking Senate computers in search of Bush-era information
- 3 African leaders cancel trip to U.S. over Ebola outbreak; Obama still plans summit
- Colorado poll shows women tuning out Democrats' 'war on women' strategy
- Report: 40% of weapons sent to Afghanistan are unaccounted for
- House votes to sue President Obama over claims of presidential power
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world