The Surge and Political Progress

Mousa Baraka

September 12, 2007

The testimonies of General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryon Crocker over the last two days have been very much in line with expectations: the surge is making progress, albeit uneven, however any wavering on the current strategy will have detrimental effects for both Iraq and the United States. Significant security progress is being made (more in some areas than others) with the last two weeks being the safest since June 2006. So confident is Gen. Petraeus in the military gains being made that he has stated that troop levels may be brought down to pre-surge levels in the summer of 2008, which Bush is expected to announce in the next coming days. But although the ‘political, economic, and diplomatic developments in Iraq’ are moving in the right direction, the line is not ‘steep’, and it is the connection between this ‘line’ and security progress produced by the surge that I shall explore.

It is widely assumed that political and economic developments cannot be made without a stable security situation. And this, to a large extent, is true. However it does not mean that there is a correlation to be expected between the political-economic situation and security; rather, as the last few months of the surge have shown, they are largely independent of each other. Changes in the political process have not changed the security situation, and improvements in the security have not changed the politics. Previous calls to widen the political spectrum in attempt to improve security had far from the desired effect. The political groups included instead began using violence to put pressure on others to help achieve their political aims. Furthermore, since the surge started overall security has improved, but there have been very few improvements in the political scene, with key legislation (e.g. oil) not being passed. This does not go without explanation. Since February, attendance within the Iraqi parliament has rarely been above two-thirds; when all the surge troops arrived and the most progress was made (the last month) parliament had been adjourned for summer recess; and finally, only until recently did Iraq have a so-called ‘national-unity’ government which would stall at every stepping point (see previous analysis). What these points show is that security and political developments cannot be assessed on the same progress line, and that they should be looked at independently.

Having said that, there is a different link to be made between American military progress and the productivity of Iraqi political parties. There are some Iraqi groups who are trying to use American timetables to portray a bleak picture of Iraq, so as to try and force a change either in the current political system, or in the leadership of that system. The mid-September Petraeus-Crocker report was one such example. Instead of being a target to make gains, some elected groups used it for exactly the opposite, shown by the increase in the number of times groups have withdrawn from government and parliament since the surge began. What this shows is that there is still a reliance or expectance that American influence can and will lead to a change in the democratic system and its democratically elected leadership. The recent efforts by previous Prime Minister Ayad Allawi in Washington illustrate this point. Although it is within his democratic right to do so, the fact that he has been garnering for support in Washington, not Baghdad, implies that change takes place in Washington rather than in the democratically elected Iraq. It is this idea that is dangerous for Iraq in the long term, and must be overcome before political progress can be made between the Iraqi parties.

Overall things are looking much better than they did before the surge started. Al-Qaeda has received several blows, especially in Anbar, where they almost cease to exist. The Mehdi Army has now been suspended after the chaos caused in Karabala, and so far this step has proven to be positive. A unified majority government now exists and all opposition has moved out of government. Leaders of the five major blocs in parliament have come together and agreed on some key issues for Iraqi progress. What is required now is for the United States to give Iraq a long term assurance as well as show an unwavering commitment to the current democratic political system, forcing Iraqis into accepting responsibility and moving forward.

News Analysis brought to you by the Iraqi Prospect Organisation - www.iprospect.org.uk

The Iraqi Prospect Organisation is an Iraqi-based network of young men and women promoting democratic values.