Truman Series: Leaving Iraq

The following is the latest in our series from fellows in the Truman National Security Project.  Jordan Tama writes:

President Obama announced today that he intends to gradually withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq between now and August 2010, reducing the number of troops in the country from 142,000 to 35-50,000. That residual force will have three missions: training and advising Iraqi security forces, protecting American civilian personnel, and conducting counterterrorism operations against Al Qaeda and other militants. Under Obama’s plan, all remaining troops will leave Iraq by the end of 2011—in accord with an existing U.S.-Iraq agreement.

Some Democrats are criticizing the plan for leaving too many troops in Iraq for too long. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi commented: “I don’t know what the justification is for 50,000. I would think a third of that, maybe 20,000 [would be sufficient].” Leading Senate Democrats also said they didn’t think such a sizable force needed to remain in Iraq after the summer of 2010.

But Obama’s plan gets it exactly right. After the tremendous progress we have made in Iraq over the past two years, it would be foolhardy to pull out nearly all of our troops precipitously and put that progress at risk. Iraqi security forces remain a work in progress, and need our support—both for training and to assist them in difficult combat missions. Without sufficient U.S. troops to provide that support during the next three years, a security vacuum could emerge that enables sectarian violence to become widespread once again.

As the military begins its withdrawal, Democrats should also acknowledge the remarkable success of the counterinsurgency strategy pursued by the U.S. since the beginning of 2007. When the war seemed hopeless, President Bush decided to send more troops to Iraq (the “surge”) to execute General Petraeus’ plan for securing the country by putting far more troops into the Iraqi streets, making them beat cops as much as soldiers. That decision, unpopular at the time, has turned out to be the best decision of Bush’s presidency. Without it, Iraq might be as violent today as it was in 2006—at huge cost to Iraqi lives as well as U.S. interests in the Middle East.

Of course, Iraq’s turnaround does not justify Bush’s decision to invade Iraq in the first place—which remains the worst decision of his presidency (and the biggest U.S. foreign policy blunder since Vietnam). A recent poll shows that 60% of Americans still think the war in Iraq was not worth fighting, and they are correct. Among other things, the war distracted us from finishing off Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, just when we had it on the ropes.

Still, Americans should take heart in the impressive achievements of our servicemen, servicewomen, diplomats, and aid workers in Iraq. They offer a measure of hope that, with a new strategy and more resources, a similar turnaround in Afghanistan is possible.

Jordan Tama is a PhD candidate at Princeton University.  The views expressed here are his own.