Is the Obama Administrations Strategy in Iraq Realistic - Assignment Example

Is the Obama Administration’s Strategy in Iraq Realistic? Pro: Yes! The Obama Administration’s Strategy in Iraq is realistic because… 1. Iran is a sovereign nation and it should take responsibility for “the determination of the Iraqi people to forge their own future”. 2. Wars are always costly and disastrous indeed and the US has spent a lot on this war. 3. The US administration couldn’t secure immunity for U.S. troops. 4. Americans are suffering from extreme fatigue regarding war of approx nine years in Iraq. 5. Obama has opposed the war from the start and now the end to it essential to fulfill a 2008 campaign promise. Con: No! The Obama Administration’s Strategy in Iraq is not realistic because… 1. The ongoing crisis in Iraq is Obama's responsibility as Iraq is at the center of a region critical to US national security. 2. Iraq is not stable, self-reliant and secure, and it is not adequate enough to defend itself from Iran. 3. Iraq government is inchoate and does not have either effective air force or military force. 4. US has made a mistake of initiating a war and now when thing have gone so wrong, US is leaving Iraq to wolves in its neighbor. 5. Obama Exit strategy should end War in Iraq but not the Peace and US troops should stay there to strengthen the Iraq forces through training. Barack Obama, the US President laid down an Exit Strategy in Iraq which went about withdrawing American troops from Iraq, leaving Iraqis to take control of their country’s future, and mapped out plans for a striking troop reduction by August 2010. Mr. Obama stated in a speech to members of the military forces that an end to the combat mission in Iraq was visible. This can be observed by words of the President as: "There will surely be difficult periods and tactical adjustments, but our enemies should be left with no doubt: this plan gives our military the forces and flexibility they need to support our Iraqi partners and to succeed. After we remove our combat brigades, our mission will change from combat to supporting the Iraqi Government and its security forces as they take the absolute lead in securing their country." Obama Administration’s plan mentioned that approximately 100,000 troops would leave Iraq by mid-2010 and rest of 35,000 to 50,000 troops would stay there to help provide security and training and, above all, counter-terrorism operations which might include armed combat.i Previously President Obama opposed “surge” strategy conceived and implemented by former President Bush which brought victory out of defeated war in Iraq, and had introduced an open, decent and effective government in Iraq that would regard the rights of its people and its neighbors. Such an Iraq might facilitate to transmute the Middle East’s toxic political culture that was seemed to be the key cause of 9/11. Obama Administration’s unconditional exit strategy in Iraq runs a risk of losing the intention to win peace.ii The Obama Administration is responsible of contrary developments in Iraq which they have declared as mission accomplished. Iraqis assume most of the blame in such circumstances, but the contribution from US will be Obama's responsibility. It matters a lot as Iraq is at the center of a region critical to US national security.iii Some analysts, who have been involved in the nearly nine-year war, criticized the decision of withdrawing troops from Iraq by saying that U.S. troops are abandoning Iraq at a time when Baghdad is not skilled for counterterrorism and able to defend against invasion. Retired Army Gen. John M. Keane argued: “We should be staying there to strengthen that democracy, to let them get the kind of political gains they need to get and keep the Iranians away from strangling that country. That should be our objective, and we are walking away from that objective.”iv Iraq’s security forces, that are seemed to be fallible and suffering from timid expertise and straight-out corruption, have mostly taken over obligation for security. The rest of the American troops in Iraq for training Iraqis would continue to hold arms and openly fire them when endangered. US Air Force would carry on surveillance and drop bombs if Iraqi forces find themselves trapped. v In Oct 2011, President Obama declared that all of the rest of the troops in Iraq would be called on, leaving the country to Iran. Previously Iraq could serve as a strategic associate who provides cooperation or assistance and base for US influence in the Middle East, but now Iran may take benefit from Iraq for being the same for them.vi Tariq Aziz, Iraq's former deputy prime minister has incriminated Barack Obama indicating that withdrawal of military troops at time of high instability and a soared up violence corresponds 'leaving Iraq to the wolves' and this may even cause the death of Iraq if continues. Aziz commented that Iraq had been in a condition worst than ever before. It took 30 years for Saddam to establish Iraq and now it is destructed. People are helpless and are being murdered day-to-day. Many are even dying with disease and hunger. "We are all victims of America and Britain…They killed our country in many ways. When you make a mistake you need to correct a mistake, not leave Iraq to its death [and] I was encouraged when [Obama] was elected president, because I thought he was going to correct some of the mistakes of Bush. But Obama is a hypocrite. He is leaving Iraq to the wolves."vii The Obama administration opinions differ when talking about Iraq. They consider the total withdrawal of troops is the evidence of how committed Obama has always been to ending the Iraq War and that President Obama’s most cherished campaign promise has been fulfilled. While, they believe on the other hand that they have always wanted to keep troops on the land after 2011 and consider it to be Iraqis’ fault that the Iraqis would not grant immunity to US troops. It seems that Obama Administration’s lack of dedication to Iraq was the essential backdrop to its poor dealing with fundamentally tough negotiations with the Iraqis. The Obama administration misguidedly asserted that the Iraqi Council of Representatives supported an immunity deal which appeared politically impossible to happen. It is quite obvious that if the administration wanted to make that deal happen, they must not have shown such forbearance regarding this matter. But Obama alternatively announced of the end of the war, although Obama commanders wanted to keep more than 20,000 troops in Iraq. This military force would have assured Iran’s already significant influence, heightened US political leverage in Baghdad and checked against a return of al-Qaeda.viii This can not work even as the US administration couldn’t secure immunity for U.S. troops. Critics such as Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) commented that the Iraqis wanted to do a deal but the Obama administration miscarried to agitate serious negotiations.ix Conclusion President Obama considers US to proceed beyond Iraq by refocusing their attention on the broader Middle East. Obama opposed the war from the beginning and stressed on that there is "no military solution" to the condition in Iraq. Wars are always costly and disastrous when the country is going through severe financial upheaval. In 2008, Obama mentioned in a speech that US had been spending $10 billion a month in Iraq and ending the war in Iraq would help conciliate the U.S. financial crisis.x Former President Bush took a risky chance in Iraq with big troop surge in 2007 which came along to be nearly a defeat in the war. Today Obama is betting on Iraq by pulling all US troops out of the ground by the end of 2011 free of costs regarding political or foreign policy. Obama decision may seem to be right regarding Iraq war ending and calling on for US combat troops which fulfills a 2008 campaign promise. It shows Obama Democratic team to be predominately anti-war and especially opposed to the Iraq mission, which is good as Americans are suffering from extreme fatigue regarding war of approx nine years in Iraq. Upon this matter Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State, mentioned that the military withdrawal was according to an agreement which was reached with Baghdad in Bush government and Iraq is a sovereign nation for which US must abide by its wants regarding all U.S. troops leave. But now the things have been indeed complicated as Iraq has no air force or intelligence service and is not capable of managing the nation’s volatile sectarian contentions, in addition to a mischief-maker in neighbor i.e. Iran. Iraq is not stable, self-reliant and secure, and it is not adequate enough to defend itself from Iran either with air force or military force as its government is even so incipient. Now it is like that Obama is benefitting politically rather socially by allowing “the determination of the Iraqi people to forge their own future”.xi Works Cited Chulov, Martin. "Saddam Hussein deputy Tariq Aziz calls for US forces to stay in Iraq." The Guardian News. UK. 5 August 2010. Web. 22 Nov 2011. Cordesman, Anthony H. "Iraq: A Time to Stay? The US Needs an Exit Strategy, Not Just an Exit." CSIS: Center For Strategic And International Studies. Washington, DC. 4 AUG 2009. Web. 22 Nov 2011. Feaver, Peter. "Obama's Iraq speech: another missed opportunity." Foreign Policy. Washington, DC. 3 August 2010. Web. 22 Nov 2011. Huntley, Steve. "Obama’s Iraq exit a risky strategy." Sun-Times. Chicago. 25 October 2011. Web. 22 Nov 2011. "Iraq Withdrawal, a Gift to Iran." THE EDITORS, National Review Online. Washington, DC. 24 OCTOBER 2011. Web. 22 Nov 2011. Jacksonville. "Obama lays down Iraq exit strategy." North Carolina. 1 March 2009. Web. 22 Nov 2011. Kaufman, Robert. "The Perils of President Obama’s National Security Policy." The Foreign Policy Initiative. Washington, DC. Web. 22 Nov 2011. Myers, Steven Lee. "Exit Strategy, Meet Your Challenge: Iraq." The Newyork Times. Washington, DC. 7 August 2010. Web. 22 Nov 2011. Obama, Barack. Council on Foreign Relations. Web. 22 Nov 2011. Scarborough, Rowan. "Key general: Iraq pullout plan a ‘disaster’." The Washington Times. Washington, DC. 23 October 2011. Web. 22 Nov 2011. Endnotes Read More