From the very beginning of the debate about the surge, its stated objective was to provide a stable environment in which the Shiia controlled Iraqi government could settle its differences with the Sunnis and Kurdish populations, reach agreement on the division of their oil revenues, take control of their country and begin rebuilding Iraq.
Some how these stated objectives were forgotten and the Republicans began crowing that the surge was working because of the reduction of ethnic violence. To them... that and that alone has become the definition of victory. Never mind the previously stated political objectives, the reduction in violence has been cause for them to once again cry "mission accomplished."
If you wanted to reduce the violence in say... NYC and you were to put 30,000 police officers on the streets of that fair metropolis, its a pretty safe bet that violent crime would take a nose dive.
But as Obama pointed out in his NYT Op-Ed piece on the subject:
My Plan for Iraq
By BARACK OBAMA
Published: July 14, 2008
But the same factors that led me to oppose the surge still hold true. The strain on our military has grown, the situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated and we’ve spent nearly $200 billion more in Iraq than we had budgeted. Iraq’s leaders have failed to invest tens of billions of dollars in oil revenues in rebuilding their own country, and they have not reached the political accommodation that was the stated purpose of the surge.
The good news is that Iraq’s leaders want to take responsibility for their country by negotiating a timetable for the removal of American troops. Meanwhile, Lt. Gen. James Dubik, the American officer in charge of training Iraq’s security forces, estimates that the Iraqi Army and police will be ready to assume responsibility for security in 2009.
Only by redeploying our troops can we press the Iraqis to reach comprehensive political accommodation and achieve a successful transition to Iraqis’ taking responsibility for the security and stability of their country. Instead of seizing the moment and encouraging Iraqis to step up, the Bush administration and Senator McCain are refusing to embrace this transition — despite their previous commitments to respect the will of Iraq’s sovereign government. They call any timetable for the removal of American troops "surrender," even though we would be turning Iraq over to a sovereign Iraqi government.
http://www.nytimes.com/...
One of the critical elements that McCain and his supporters have constantly tried to claim as a key result of the Surge was the "Awakening Councils" in Sunni territories where with US aide the Sunni's themselves began attacking the Al Qaeda cells in their country.
Of course they neglect to say that the Awakening began many months before the surge actually began, but hey... never let it be said that facts got in the way of Republican rhetoric!
Its no secret in Iraq that the Awakening is considered to be one of the main factors for the dramatic decrease in violence in Iraq. The single biggest mistake the US made in Iraq, besides invading it in the first place, was to disband the Iraqi military and these Sunni soldiers quickly turned into insurgents.
The Awakening program turned that around but it is now quickly about to become unraveled and may lead back to civil war. The Maliki government has begun attacking the leaders of the Awakening councils and without any of the political reconciliation goals that the surge was supposed to facilitate... those Sunni Awakening members could be left with only one option... to once again become insurgents!
This piece was published in the NYT today:
Iraq Takes Aim at Leaders of U.S.-Tied Sunni Groups
Excerpt:
BAGHDAD — The Shiite-dominated government in Iraq is driving out many leaders of Sunni citizen patrols, the groups of former insurgents who joined the American payroll and have been a major pillar in the decline in violence around the nation.
In restive Diyala Province, Unites States and Iraqi military officials say there were orders to arrest hundreds of members of what is known as the Awakening movement as part of large security operations by the Iraqi military. At least five senior members have been arrested there in recent weeks, leaders of the groups say.
West of Baghdad, former insurgent leaders contend that the Iraqi military is going after 650 Awakening members, many of whom have fled the once-violent area they had kept safe. While the crackdown appears to be focused on a relatively small number of leaders whom the Iraqi government considers the most dangerous, there are influential voices to dismantle the American backed movement entirely.
"The state cannot accept the Awakening," said Sheik Jalaladeen al-Sagheer, a leading Shiite member of Parliament. "Their days are numbered."
The government’s rising hostility toward the Awakening Councils amounts to a bet that its military, feeling increasingly strong, can provide security in former guerrilla strongholds without the support of these former Sunni fighters who once waged devastating attacks on United States and Iraqi targets. It also is occurring as Awakening members are eager to translate their influence and organization on the ground into political power.
But it is causing a rift with the American military, which contends that any significant diminution of the Awakening could result in renewed violence, jeopardizing the substantial security gains in the past year. United States commanders say that the practice, however unconventional, of paying the guerrillas has saved the lives of hundreds of American soldiers.
"If it is not handled properly, we could have a security issue," said Brig. Gen. David Perkins, the senior military spokesman in Iraq. "You don’t want to give anybody a reason to turn back to Al Qaeda." Many Sunni insurgents had previously been allied with Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia and other extremist groups.
SNIP!
The American military began paying many members of the Awakening movement as the program expanded, even including Shiite members who make up about one-fifth of the program. Now they are paid roughly $300 a month by the United States to guard checkpoints and buildings and — for those who used to be insurgents — to no longer blow up American convoys and shoot American troops.
Although the "surge" is often described as the turning point that led to lower violence, a number of American officers contend the Awakening that began well before the surge in 2006 in Anbar Province and continued in Baghdad last year was the most significant reason for the decline. In some places, American casualties plunged within weeks of the Sunnis joining with American forces.
Col. Kurt Pinkerton, the former American battalion commander who oversaw the Awakening program established west of Abu Ghraib last year, said it was critical to quelling violence.
"I don’t think that area would have been calmed without those guys," he said, giving credit to three of the most important members, including Abu Marouf, who are now being tracked down by General Nassir.
Snip!
Despite the threat of arrest by General Nassir’s troops, Abu Azzam, one of the leaders of the Awakening near Abu Ghraib, said he had met with aides to Mr. Maliki to discuss how the Shiite-dominated government and former Sunni guerrillas might be able to reconcile.
"Our men worked hard and deserve appreciation and not punishment from the government," he said.
He described the discussions as "not going well," though he said some Maliki aides preferred a more conciliatory tack.
"For now, everything is stopped," he said. He also said he feared the pullout of American troops, whom he saw as restraining the Shiite government from taken even harsher action against the Awakening. "America is the only one asking us not to fight the Maliki government."
http://www.nytimes.com/...