[Mb-civic] America's Message To Iraq - David Ignatius - Washington Post Op-Ed

[William Swiggard]

America's Message To Iraq

By David Ignatius
Wednesday, January 25, 2006; A19

America's agile envoy in Baghdad, Zalmay Khalilzad, is working these 
days to cajole Iraqi political leaders to put aside narrow interests in 
favor of a government of national unity. But behind the political 
dickering lies a stark message: If the Iraqis can't agree on a 
broad-based government of reconciliation, the United States may have to 
reduce its military and economic support. America won't bankroll one 
side in a civil war.

I spoke with Khalilzad by telephone this week about his efforts to coax 
a compromise from the Iraqis. By most accounts, the Afghan-born diplomat 
has been a brilliant ringmaster of the Baghdad political circus. But 
even he can't soften the dilemma facing the Iraqis: They must find a way 
to work together or the fragile Iraqi state will unravel.

The American envoy is deploying a weapon the United States hasn't used 
much in Iraq -- the word "no." He said he is arguing that the new 
government must give the two security ministries -- Interior and Defense 
-- to people who have broad national support and aren't linked to 
sectarian militias. Otherwise, America may have to adjust its massive 
effort to train and equip the Iraqi security forces.

"The security ministries have to be run by people who are not associated 
with militias and who are not regarded as sectarian," Khalilzad told me. 
"The issue is how forces that we're investing a huge amount of money in 
are perceived by the Iraqis. If they are perceived as sectarian, their 
effectiveness will not be there. We have insisted on this, stated it 
clearly. These two ministries need people who are acceptable to all 
parties of a national unity government. . . . We are saying: If you 
choose the wrong candidates, that will affect U.S. aid."

Khalilzad's message is aimed largely at Abdul Aziz Hakim, the leader of 
the Shiite religious coalition that won the largest number of votes in 
December's election. The current interior minister is a close ally of 
Hakim's and a former leader of the Shiite militia known as the Badr 
Brigade. U.S. officials believe that under his control, the Interior 
Ministry has condoned torture of Sunni prisoners and increasingly used 
the police to settle sectarian scores. That must stop, the Americans argue.

U.S. officials see Iraq at a decisive turning point following December's 
election to choose a permanent government. They had hoped the balloting 
would open the way for a secular coalition that might bridge the bitter 
divisions among Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds. Instead, the balloting 
reinforced those sectarian tendencies. Iraqis voted their fears and the 
us-or-them logic of sectarian conflict. Religious and ethnic parties 
that maintain strong militias did well; secular parties that support 
national institutions did poorly.

"We've reached a point of no return now," argues Raad Alkadiri, an 
Anglo-Iraqi who advised the British government in Baghdad during the 
first year of occupation and who is now a consultant with PFC Energy in 
Washington. "Are Iraqis willing to put aside their narrow interests? Is 
there a real Iraqi state? You can't fudge this. This is the edge of the 
precipice."

Khalilzad is telling Shiite and Kurdish leaders that they have a golden 
opportunity to stabilize the country because of a sharp split that is 
emerging within the Sunni insurgency. Sunni tribal and political leaders 
who had been backing the insurgency are increasingly angry at the 
terrorist tactics of al Qaeda's leader in Iraq, Abu Musab Zarqawi. That 
opens the way for a deal -- if the Shiites and Kurds want one. "The 
tectonics are shifting in the Sunni heartland," Khalilzad told me. "A 
fault line is developing that is going to expand, between Zarqawi and 
his allies and elements of the insurgency."

If the Iraqis can reach across the sectarian chasm, it could mark the 
beginning of a virtuous cycle in Iraq that could finally bring a measure 
of stability and prosperity. Khalilzad has been talking with Iraqi 
leaders about a "First 100 Days" program that would get the new 
government off to a fast start. He has discussed creating a National 
Security Council that would hammer out consensus within a small 
leadership group. He is talking with Iraqi leaders about a national Bill 
of Assurances that would address the anxieties of each sect. But all 
these good steps require the basic willingness to compromise, bury the 
hatchets and bring in the Sunnis.

Khalilzad's message is that America's money and patience aren't 
unlimited. If the Iraqis can come together to build a framework for 
cooperation, America stands with them. If they can't pull together, they 
will eventually have to face the nightmare of a shattered Iraq on their 
own. Ironically, that's America's hidden leverage in Iraq -- the power 
to walk away.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/24/AR2006012401149.html?nav=hcmodule
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20060125/a0e3d5a1/attachment.htm