Do Like Reagan

Let history record that this was the first week since the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 that commentators began asking whether the President Bush should do like his role model, President Reagan, did and “cut and run” from Iraq the way Reagan did from Lebanon. This is also the week that polls among U.S. citizens show 56% now think it's not worth the effort to continue fighting in Iraq, compared to 41% who do.

The horrible bombing killing 19 U.S. GIs, 22 in all and wounding 60, at the mess hall in Mosul Tuesday underscored the terrible preparation by the U.S. for the conflict. U.S. citizens as well as Iraqis putting themselves in harm's way by seeking training from exposed U.S. troops are beginning to wonder why our forces seem increasingly to be sitting ducks for lethal enemy guerilla tactics.

Not only is the lack of preparedness of and support for U.S. forces becoming more evident by the day, but so is the face of the enemy in Iraq. Even though the continuing woefulness of U.S. intelligence capabilities means that the actual names and locations of key leaders of the opposition remain a mystery, sources indicate that it's clear the attacks on U.S. forces are orchestrated by trained military leaders.

These are not random acts perpetrated by crazed terrorist fanatics. These are manifestations of a coordinated guerilla resistance movement led by former leading members of the Iraqi armed forces under Saddam Hussein. Theirs is a popular insurgency against a foreign occupier, drawing support from a broad cross-section of domestic and foreign groups, alike.

Kept at bay in Iraq when Hussein was in power, elements of the al Qaeda and affiliated terrorist groups have been free to sweep into the country since the ill-planned and undermanned U.S. invasion, which created a climate of virtual lawlessness throughout whole sections of the land. Now, they are linking up with Hussein's former military leaders to buoy the deadly insurgency.

The drumbeat for Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld's head is now coming from the conservative wing of his own party, but it's not surprising. There is an urgency within the Bush Administration to find a scapegoat for all this, and fingers are pointing at Rummy.

One thing is becoming increasingly clear: things cannot remain at the current status quo level with regard to U.S. military involvement in Iraq. The resistance is getting stronger and more emboldened. The U.S. vulnerabilities are being scoped out and increasingly exploited. Without calling for a dramatic change of course, the situation is going to get far worse, and the U.S. public will become ever more impatient and outraged at its government's inability to protect its forces and secure the peace.

But, as always, President Bush is having a very difficult time coping with failure, or with admitting he's ever done anything wrong. He could limp along with the status quo at his own grave peril.

However, the removal of Rumsfeld is a necessary first step to a dramatic change in U.S. policy. Were this to happen, under cover of blaming Rumsfeld for everything gone wrong in Iraq, the administration will lurch in one of two directions, currently being debated fiercely behind the scenes.

The first scenario calls for a huge mobilization to infuse fresh troops and armor into Iraq, and with it a push for universal conscription. The second calls for invoking Reagan's “wisdom” in cutting U.S. losses in Lebanon in the 1980s, and using it as a model for pulling out of Iraq altogether. Wildly different options.

All three paths, status quo, escalation or withdrawal, carry heavy political costs for the administration. The attack in Mosul on Tuesday, coming shortly after Rumsfeld's disastrous performance in front of U.S. troops demanding more armor, has suddenly called the U.S. population's attention to just how bad the mess in Iraq really is for our courageous but unprotected forces.

There is no “light at the end of the tunnel” in the form of democratic elections in Iraq, either. The country was never a truly unified people, but three predominant tribal domains sewn together with political muscle by the British to undo the Ottoman Empire, each with enmity toward the other. The myth that democracy was ever the Bush administration's goal in Iraq is being exploded the closer to “election day” we get.

Nicholas Benton may be emailed at nfbenton@fcnp.com