08.05.2005 Tom Hayden
The Exit Plan from Iraq
In response to calls from peace groups, an ad hoc coalition of Congress members will begin hearings on an Iraq exit strategy next month. Here is a working paper to that end:
An Exit Plan from War and Occupation (summary)
The Exit Plan from Iraq
In response to calls from peace groups, an ad hoc coalition of Congress members will begin hearings on an Iraq exit strategy next month. Here is a working paper to that end:
An Exit Plan from War and Occupation (summary)
TURN TOWARDS PEACE, NOT QUAGMIRE. It is time to turn American power towards peace in Iraq through diplomacy, trade, economic development, and respect for Iraqi rights to self-determination. While some Americans may still claim “victories” -- the defeat of a dictator, the birth of democratic elections -- it is clear that the costs of our continued war and occupation are greater than any benefits. We are all prisoners of this war.
COSTS OUTWEIGH BENEFITS. By the end of this year, some 2,000 American soldiers will have died, along with hundreds of American contractors. At least 13,000 Americans have been wounded in action and tens of thousands will come home with serious mental health problems. Unknown numbers of Iraqi civilians and combatants are dead, wounded, traumatized, uprooted -- 3,240 Iraqi civilians killed in one month, according to a 2003 hospital survey by the Associated Press. The war costs taxpayers one billion dollars per week, enough to fund health insurance for 46 million people. Our allies in the “coalition” are withdrawing; nearly all will be gone by this year's end. Our reputation is in shambles. We are not safer at home. Our resources are tied down in Iraq while terrorists freely bomb England and Egypt.
THERE IS NO MILITARY SOLUTION. Our invasion unified a violent nationalist resistance and attracted jihadists from across the region. Insurgent attacks per month more than quadrupled from June 2003 to June 2005. Large majorities of both Sunnis and Shiites oppose the occupation. Our State Department's own surveys show that most Iraqis feel less safe under our soldiers' presence. We contributed to the danger of civil war by fostering both a government and army dominated by Shiites and Kurds at the expense of Sunnis.
RECONSTRUCTION IS IMPOSSIBLE UNDER OCCUPATION. It is impossible to promote jobs and economic development when we cannot protect oil fields, electricity lines, transportation systems and social service delivery. Of $18.4 billion appropriated for reconstruction, little has been spent. Of that sum, 73 percent lines the pockets of US contractors, with only 27 cents on the dollar benefiting Iraqis. The imposition of neo-liberal economics (privatization, de-regulation, flat taxes) have alienated the Iraqi business class and limited social welfare budgets. In addition to military invasion, our government has intervened against Iraq's economic sovereignty.
ACKNOWLEDGE LIMITS, SET NEW DIRECTION. We must recognize the limits of our policies and choose a better approach. The alternatives are not simple, easy or guaranteed, but the status quo is simply no longer an option.
We must turn from the model of war and occupation to a primary emphasis on conflict resolution. Here are ten steps.
1. The US should declare no permanent or imperial interest in controlling Iraq. That means no permanent bases, no control of oil fields, no corporate dominance. This would be critical to producing an atmosphere leading to talks.
2. The US should offer a timetable for ending the occupation and withdrawing troops as an encouragement to the peace process. The US should declare its intention to begin withdrawal after the projected Iraqi elections scheduled for 2006, and begin now with a significant unilateral withdrawal step no later than the end of this year. American military forces should cease offensive combat operations immediately. As a further incentive, the US should repeal all neo-liberal economic policies imposed by the occupation which deny Iraqi businesses and the Iraqi people the right to control their economic development and resources.
3. The US should request the United Nations to organize the reconstruction effort and to monitor the military withdrawal process. This request will only be taken seriously in the context of a US announcement of withdrawal.
4. The President should express a commitment to a Marshall Plan for Iraq under international sponsorship. An alternative model is needed to a“reconstruction” benefiting US multinationals during a military occupation.
5. The President should appoint an experienced peace envoy independent of the Pentagon or any agencies of the American occupation. The model might be that of Sen. George Mitchell's mission to Northern Ireland.
6. The US should seek peace talks with Iraqi resistance groups and intermediaries. The peace envoy should promote cease-fires and open-ended peace talks on multi-level tracks without conditions with all insurgent groups or their intermediaries, Iraqi government officials, and Iraqi non-governmental organizations. This process already has begun among Iraqis.
7. The US should encourage a political settlement opening doors to Sunnis and disaffected communities. To lessen the chances of civil war, the constitutional discussions should incorporate reforms that encourage conflict resolution and violence reduction. These would include, but not be limited to, self-governance in occupied Sunni areas, basing assembly seats on local districts, community policing with local review boards, guaranteed representation for Sunnis and minorities, power-sharing over oil resources, and general amnesties and time served for most insurgent combatants and ex-Baathists.
8. The US cannot defeat jihad militarily but can weaken support for the jihadist rationale among Iraqis. The proposed new US policies would deprive the most militant holy warriors of their main justification for terrorism. Their popular support in Iraq will shrink or they may choose to fight on other battlefields. No one can be optimistic about completely ending this threat, but our aggressive occupation policies have only worsened it.
9. Negotiate for legitimate US interests. The peace envoy should negotiate all feasible assurances that the American troop withdrawal will be honored, that Americans will be eligible for reasonable allocations -- but not control -- of Iraqi oil resources, and that postwar Iraq will take effective steps against becoming a center for aggression against any other countries in the region.
10. The US should negotiate tension reduction in the region. Violence in Iraq will be diminished, and regional collaboration increased, if the US replaces its aggressive threats against Iran and Syria with steps towards diplomatic negotiation, and brokers a viable Palestinian state.
Any viable peace process will rely on the awakened force of American and global public opinion. Political leaders should align themselves with the millions of people who insist on a greater emphasis on social justice, human rights, the end of poverty, hunger and humiliation, and conflict resolution as a first priority over the option of war.
These steps might be painful and bitter for some, but the truth is that it is folly to believe that the US government can gain through negotiations what it cannot achieve on the battlefield, and it is immoral, dishonest, unrealistic and counter-productive to keep sending young Americans to die in a quagmire.
Instead of “staying the course”, the prudent path is to change the course, beginning now.
