Both elements of this approach -- the Bush administration suddenly engaging Iran and Syria in conversation and political leaders within Iraq mustering the courage to "talk it over" as a country -- seem hard to imagine.To achieve peace in Iraq and security in the Persian Gulf, the United States should seek an immediate cease-fire in Iraq and launch two sets of simultaneous negotiations, one for the Iraqis designed to end the civil war and bring national unity and peace to their tormented country, and the second involving the United States, Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia to address international questions, such as preventing outside intervention, safeguarding Iraq's frontiers against infiltration by terrorists and providing international assistance for Iraq's reconstruction. If anything is clear from the last six years of war, it is that Iraqis reject outside dictation. The two-level approach empowers them to solve their own problems protected and aided by a concert of outside powers.
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
How to End the War in Iraq
Professor Ed Haley wrote an op/ed in the San Francisco Chronicle this week about the thorniest issue in the American political debate at the moment: Iraq. Money graf:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Nothing new under the sun here...
I wonder what Haley would say to Michael O'Hanlon and others who have actually been to Iraq and have remarked that while the surge is less than ideal, it is slowly working.
What Haley doesn't understand is that talking with Iran may in fact encourage them. Take the issue of hostages, for instance, in which Iran captured over a dozen English sailors. Iran was testing the resolve of the West and when nothing happened, they grew emboldened and abducted still more foreign citizens.
Goodness, whatever happened to strength with superior firepower? Clearly Rumsfeld didn't get the memo by going into Iraq so light, but isn't there something we can do about it now?
Post a Comment