Bolivia

Venezuela

Trinidad
&
Caribbean








Very usefull links




ISSUES....
Inside, confidential, off the record


One for home


Leave to James Baker -- the master of turning a US surrender and retreat
from Iraq into an art masterpiece. When Gates testified before Congress
yesterday, he said he did not know if the US "was winning or losing" in
Iraq. He needs to talk to his close friend James Baker, who told Congress
in no uncertain terms today that the US is definitely losing in Iraq and
must therefore sue for peace. These two need to get their stories straight.

They are both wrong. The US is finally winning in Iraq while Iran, at long
last, is losing, no thanks to Baker, Gates, or Rice, but to Sadr , Maliki,
President Bush and Steven Hadley.

Above all, the great reward for US success goes to Iraqi Shia leader Abdul
Azziz al-Hakim and Iran's President Ahmadinejad. Their blunders took Iran
out of the policy game in Iraq, in a stunning and entirely undeserved
windfall for the US.

First, what is Baker trying to accomplish with his new plan? This is
simple. He wants the applause for giving way to popular demands for US
troop withdrawals and US "engagement" (in reality appeasement) of Syria and
Iran. He has not given a moment's thought as to how to translate these
policies into reality; indeed, no practical way exists to do so. As far as
Baker is concerned, working out such messy details is someone else's job.
Well before the reality sets in that Baker's plan is primed to
self-destruct, he is on his way to his next project, while the "someone
else" gets blamed for failure.

Why will Baker's plan of a pre-emptive surrender to Syria and Iran, followed
by US troop withdrawals, not work in the case of Iraq? First, Syria does
not want a US surrender in Iraq. It wants a US victory, which is now within
reach, that ill contain Iran, which is the real threat to Syria, not Israel.
To this end, Assad is supporting Muqtada al-Sadr and Prime Minister
Maliki, as is the US, against Iran, which is also the real threat to Iraq,
not the US.

Second, as for Iran, it is in no shape to accept a US surrender in Iraq. In
fact, Iran is seriously overstretched by provoking and thereby buying into
two potentially major regional conflicts, in Iraq and Lebanon. On the very
bad advice of Hakim and Hezbollah, Iran rolled the dice by provoking a coup
d'etat in Iraq, to displace Maliki; and in Lebanon, to displace Siniora.
Both coups have bogged down and will likely fail altogether, in a major and
potentially fatal political embarrassment for Ahmadinejad.

Iran's big problem is literally lacks the financing and the military reach
to take part in these conflicts in the event the failed coups precipitate
civil war, which is already underway in Iraq, and just over the horizon in
Lebanon. Iran can always fight in Iraq And Lebanon through proxiy forces,
as it is doing today via Hakim and the Badr Brigade in Iraq and Hezbollah in
Lebanon, but runs a large risk of being sucked in to use its own forces and
humiliated. Ahmadinejad is certainly not sleeping well these days.

In short, Iran has been defeated in Iraq and Lebanon, beginning this week.
Baker is trying to surrender Iraq to a loser. Iran, it is safe to predict,
will refuse to accept Baker's White Flag in Iraq. Iran will beg the US to
stay in Iraq, if for no other reason than to protect Iran from Muqtada
al-Sadr. To put it another way, Iran does not want to do peacekeeping and
economic reconstruction in Iraq, period, or in Lebanon.

Who deserves credit for this US success. The answer is President Bush and
Steven Hadley, who refused to throw the Maliki-Sadr government in Iraq to
the wolves, as demanded by Hakim and no doubt approved, mistakenly, by
Ahmadinejad. Like James Baker, President Ahmadinejad may be done in by a
fatal flaw - the taste for an easy win while ignoring the Devil lurking in
the details.


From: Iran-Watch.com / 12.07.06

 

ISSUES....

Is an independent journalist effort from Petroleumworld, on Inside, Confidential
and Off The Record Information, its views are not necessarily those of
Petroleumworld

Legal information: Copyright/Disclaimer


Copyright ©Petroleumworld, 1999-2006, All rights reserved

 

Send this story to a friend

Your feedback is important to us!

We invite all our readers to share with us
their views and comments about this article.

Write to editor@petroleumworld.com


Any question or suggestions, please write to:
editor@petroleumworld.com


3


Best Viewed with IE 5.01+
Windows NT 4.0, '95, '98 and ME +/ 800x600 pixels

TOP

This site is a public free site and it contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of business, environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have chosen to view the included information for research, information, and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/us code/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from Petroleumworld or the copyright owner of the material.