U.S. may have weeks, not months, to avert civil war, adviser warns
James Sterngold, Chronicle Staff Writer

Wednesday, October 18, 2006


Printable Version
Email This Article




With the violence in Iraq flaring dangerously, a national consensus is
growing, even among senior Republicans, that the United States must
consider a major change in strategy in the coming months.

But in a sign of the growing sense of urgency, a member of a
high-powered government advisory body that is developing options to
prevent Iraq's chaotic collapse warns that the United States could have
just weeks, not months, to avoid an all-out civil war.

"There's a sense among many people now that things in Iraq are slipping
fast and there isn't a lot of time to reverse them," said Larry
Diamond, one of a panel of experts advising the Iraq Study Group, which
is preparing a range of policy alternatives for President Bush.

"The civil war is already well along. We have no way of knowing if it's
too late until we try a radically different course," said Diamond, an
expert on building democracies who is at Stanford University's Hoover
Institution and is a former adviser to the Coalition Provisional
Authority in Iraq.

The co-chairman of the Iraq Study Group, former Secretary of State
James Baker, has already made headlines by saying that "stay the
course" is no longer a viable strategy and that some kind of change
will be required. The study group's final report is not due until after
the November election, but Baker has insisted in several interviews
over the past two weeks that the United States must place greater
emphasis on diplomacy, including talks with avowed U.S. foes such as
Syria and Iran, in an effort to stabilize Iraq. He has said the United
States should place less emphasis on military force alone.

"I believe in talking to your enemies,'' Baker said in an interview on
ABC. "'It's got to be hard-nosed, it's got to be determined. You don't
give away anything, but in my view, it's not appeasement to talk to
your enemies."

Baker's comments have been echoed by another prominent Republican,
Virginia Sen. John Warner, the influential chairman of the Senate Armed
Services Committee. After a visit to Iraq, Warner said he believes a
change in course might be required if the situation does not improve in
the next two months. Two other Republicans, Sens. Chuck Hagel of
Nebraska and Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, also have urged changes in
policy.

Because it could lead to a major policy shift, the release of the study
group's report could prove a critical event in the course of the war in
Iraq.

Diamond said in an interview that he was expressing strictly his
personal opinions, not necessarily those of the study group. He said he
was prohibited by a confidentiality agreement from disclosing any of
the group's internal discussions beyond what Baker himself has publicly
provided.

But having studied the situation in Iraq closely almost from the time
Saddam Hussein was toppled in April 2003, and having been involved in
trying to build a functioning democracy there, Diamond said the one
thing the United States might no longer have is time. The Bush
administration needs to initiate a "crash program" to avoid a
catastrophe, he said. A key element would include bringing in new U.S.
leadership to rebuild America's battered credibility in Iraq and the
region.

Diamond proposes a multipronged diplomatic strategy intended to woo
secular groups away from extremists and to define a more equitable
power-sharing arrangement within the fragile Iraqi government to build
popular support.

If the Bush administration does not move rapidly in this direction and
the violence continues to rise, Diamond said he fears Iraq's central
government could be overthrown or collapse and the Iraqi military might
disintegrate, leaving heavily armed militias controlled by the Kurds,
the Shiites and the Sunnis in a bloody struggle for power. The already
heavy civilian death toll could soar still higher, dragging Iraq's
neighbors into the chaos, he said.

The result, Diamond warned, could be the transformation of the
Sunni-dominated Anbar province west of Baghdad into a zone effectively
controlled by Islamic extremists, filled with terrorist training camps.


"What worries me more than any other single thing," Diamond said, "is
if the country does effectively get broken up through a civil war --
and Anbar province, where most of the Sunnis live, becomes what
Afghanistan was before 9/11."

At best, Diamond said, it appears the United States has a few months to
implement a new strategy. He added, though, that an atrocity by an
Iraqi group -- such as the bombing of the Askariya shrine, sacred to
Shiites, in Samarra in February -- could trigger a cycle of retaliation
that might spin out of control and give the United States even less
time to act.

The first step the Bush administration should take is to renounce any
plan to maintain permanent U.S. military bases in the country, said
Diamond. Polls inside the country have shown that the vast majority of
Iraqis fear that the secret U.S. aim is to continue to occupy Iraq and
control its oil, a view that has fueled the insurgency.

The administration should simultaneously open discussions with the
Sunnis, the Kurds and the Shiites aimed at instituting previously
discussed revisions to the Iraqi Constitution to ensure that the
minority Sunnis obtain a fair share of political power and an equitable
portion of Iraq's oil wealth. Even insurgents should be part of the
dialogue, he said.

"We need to have comprehensive, intensive, serious negotiations with
the insurgents," Diamond said.

Diamond suggested that Baker, or another elder statesmen from outside
the Bush White House, might be a good candidate to lead the effort.

"That's the only thing that's going to demonstrate that we're really
changing course," said Diamond.

A fair arrangement, Diamond said, could peel away secular Sunnis from
jihadi extremists, providing a firmer base of support for the Iraqi
government. Those discussions, Diamond said, need to involve the United
Nations, the European Union and other Arab governments in the region.

The United States should also announce plans for a flexible drawdown of
troops over a period of from 18 months to 3 years, he said. Some troops
should be redeployed to other countries in the region, such as Kuwait
and Qatar, to ensure that the United States can respond swiftly to any
crises, but a substantial number should return to their U.S. bases, he
said.

And a large number of those troops should be sent to Afghanistan,
Diamond added, to combat the Taliban resurgence there.

He emphasized that the Iraq plan should be flexible so that, if things
stabilize, the troops can leave earlier or the drawdown can be slowed
if violence flares.

"That's the only way of inducing the competing Iraqi political forces
to take responsibility for the future of their country," he said.

As long as U.S. troops are seen as the sole guarantor of some level of
stability, Diamond argued, Iraqi politicians will continue to stake out
extreme positions and compete for all the power and wealth they can
gain for their constituencies, without any sense that they need to
build compromises to bring about stability on their own.

Diamond stressed that the Bush administration has to move forward on
all these different tracks simultaneously, in part because they are
interconnected and in part because there is no time to wait for the
resolution of one issue before moving on to the next.

"This is the fourth quarter, there's two minutes left in the game, and
we're down two touchdowns," said Diamond. "There may not be enough time
left."

"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...


"The civil war is already well along. We have no way of knowing if it's
too late until we try a radically different course," said Diamond, an
expert on building democracies who is at Stanford University's Hoover
Institution and is a former adviser to the Coalition Provisional
Authority in Iraq.

How does one become an expert at something that's rarely achieved? :-)

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...


"The civil war is already well along. We have no way of knowing if it's
too late until we try a radically different course," said Diamond, an
expert on building democracies who is at Stanford University's Hoover
Institution and is a former adviser to the Coalition Provisional
Authority in Iraq.

How does one become an expert at something that's rarely achieved? :-)

Don't know, but he seems to know what he's talking about. Iraq is going
downhill FAST. How many died yesterday? How many the day before? What
Bush and his henchmen are doing is idiotic at best, criminal at worst.

basskisser wrote:
U.S. may have weeks, not months, to avert civil war, adviser warns
James Sterngold, Chronicle Staff Writer

Wednesday, October 18, 2006


Printable Version
Email This Article




With the violence in Iraq flaring dangerously, a national consensus is
growing, even among senior Republicans, that the United States must
consider a major change in strategy in the coming months.

But in a sign of the growing sense of urgency, a member of a
high-powered government advisory body that is developing options to
prevent Iraq's chaotic collapse warns that the United States could have
just weeks, not months, to avoid an all-out civil war.

"There's a sense among many people now that things in Iraq are slipping
fast and there isn't a lot of time to reverse them," said Larry
Diamond, one of a panel of experts advising the Iraq Study Group, which
is preparing a range of policy alternatives for President Bush.

"The civil war is already well along. We have no way of knowing if it's
too late until we try a radically different course," said Diamond, an
expert on building democracies who is at Stanford University's Hoover
Institution and is a former adviser to the Coalition Provisional
Authority in Iraq.

The co-chairman of the Iraq Study Group, former Secretary of State
James Baker, has already made headlines by saying that "stay the
course" is no longer a viable strategy and that some kind of change
will be required. The study group's final report is not due until after
the November election, but Baker has insisted in several interviews
over the past two weeks that the United States must place greater
emphasis on diplomacy, including talks with avowed U.S. foes such as
Syria and Iran, in an effort to stabilize Iraq. He has said the United
States should place less emphasis on military force alone.

"I believe in talking to your enemies,'' Baker said in an interview on
ABC. "'It's got to be hard-nosed, it's got to be determined. You don't
give away anything, but in my view, it's not appeasement to talk to
your enemies."

Baker's comments have been echoed by another prominent Republican,
Virginia Sen. John Warner, the influential chairman of the Senate Armed
Services Committee. After a visit to Iraq, Warner said he believes a
change in course might be required if the situation does not improve in
the next two months. Two other Republicans, Sens. Chuck Hagel of
Nebraska and Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, also have urged changes in
policy.

Because it could lead to a major policy shift, the release of the study
group's report could prove a critical event in the course of the war in
Iraq.

Diamond said in an interview that he was expressing strictly his
personal opinions, not necessarily those of the study group. He said he
was prohibited by a confidentiality agreement from disclosing any of
the group's internal discussions beyond what Baker himself has publicly
provided.

But having studied the situation in Iraq closely almost from the time
Saddam Hussein was toppled in April 2003, and having been involved in
trying to build a functioning democracy there, Diamond said the one
thing the United States might no longer have is time. The Bush
administration needs to initiate a "crash program" to avoid a
catastrophe, he said. A key element would include bringing in new U.S.
leadership to rebuild America's battered credibility in Iraq and the
region.

Diamond proposes a multipronged diplomatic strategy intended to woo
secular groups away from extremists and to define a more equitable
power-sharing arrangement within the fragile Iraqi government to build
popular support.

If the Bush administration does not move rapidly in this direction and
the violence continues to rise, Diamond said he fears Iraq's central
government could be overthrown or collapse and the Iraqi military might
disintegrate, leaving heavily armed militias controlled by the Kurds,
the Shiites and the Sunnis in a bloody struggle for power. The already
heavy civilian death toll could soar still higher, dragging Iraq's
neighbors into the chaos, he said.

The result, Diamond warned, could be the transformation of the
Sunni-dominated Anbar province west of Baghdad into a zone effectively
controlled by Islamic extremists, filled with terrorist training camps.


"What worries me more than any other single thing," Diamond said, "is
if the country does effectively get broken up through a civil war --
and Anbar province, where most of the Sunnis live, becomes what
Afghanistan was before 9/11."

At best, Diamond said, it appears the United States has a few months to
implement a new strategy. He added, though, that an atrocity by an
Iraqi group -- such as the bombing of the Askariya shrine, sacred to
Shiites, in Samarra in February -- could trigger a cycle of retaliation
that might spin out of control and give the United States even less
time to act.

The first step the Bush administration should take is to renounce any
plan to maintain permanent U.S. military bases in the country, said
Diamond. Polls inside the country have shown that the vast majority of
Iraqis fear that the secret U.S. aim is to continue to occupy Iraq and
control its oil, a view that has fueled the insurgency.

The administration should simultaneously open discussions with the
Sunnis, the Kurds and the Shiites aimed at instituting previously
discussed revisions to the Iraqi Constitution to ensure that the
minority Sunnis obtain a fair share of political power and an equitable
portion of Iraq's oil wealth. Even insurgents should be part of the
dialogue, he said.

"We need to have comprehensive, intensive, serious negotiations with
the insurgents," Diamond said.

Diamond suggested that Baker, or another elder statesmen from outside
the Bush White House, might be a good candidate to lead the effort.

"That's the only thing that's going to demonstrate that we're really
changing course," said Diamond.

A fair arrangement, Diamond said, could peel away secular Sunnis from
jihadi extremists, providing a firmer base of support for the Iraqi
government. Those discussions, Diamond said, need to involve the United
Nations, the European Union and other Arab governments in the region.

The United States should also announce plans for a flexible drawdown of
troops over a period of from 18 months to 3 years, he said. Some troops
should be redeployed to other countries in the region, such as Kuwait
and Qatar, to ensure that the United States can respond swiftly to any
crises, but a substantial number should return to their U.S. bases, he
said.

And a large number of those troops should be sent to Afghanistan,
Diamond added, to combat the Taliban resurgence there.

He emphasized that the Iraq plan should be flexible so that, if things
stabilize, the troops can leave earlier or the drawdown can be slowed
if violence flares.

"That's the only way of inducing the competing Iraqi political forces
to take responsibility for the future of their country," he said.

As long as U.S. troops are seen as the sole guarantor of some level of
stability, Diamond argued, Iraqi politicians will continue to stake out
extreme positions and compete for all the power and wealth they can
gain for their constituencies, without any sense that they need to
build compromises to bring about stability on their own.

Diamond stressed that the Bush administration has to move forward on
all these different tracks simultaneously, in part because they are
interconnected and in part because there is no time to wait for the
resolution of one issue before moving on to the next.

"This is the fourth quarter, there's two minutes left in the game, and
we're down two touchdowns," said Diamond. "There may not be enough time
left."

"Tom Francis" wrote in message
...
On 18 Oct 2006 07:38:21 -0700, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:

"This is the fourth quarter, there's two minutes left in the game, and
we're down two touchdowns," said Diamond. "There may not be enough time
left."

Shut up and play football.

It is the newest incarnation of ZPG. Zero Population Growth.

"basskisser" wrote in news:1161175129.212552.242810
@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:

"This is the fourth quarter, there's two minutes left in the game, and
we're down two touchdowns," said Diamond. "There may not be enough time
left."



If you look back at my predictions the day the second invasion started,
you'll find I predicted Iraq would be another Lebanon, which was also the
fault of Israel and its US proxy army, way back when.

We're just turning yet another two Arab countries into Lebanon run by the
war lords with no central government that can threaten the State of Israel,
as intended....

The plan worked perfectly......



--
There's amazing intelligence in the Universe.
You can tell because none of them ever called Earth.

..