|
|
| |
US has lost control in Iraq, says military strategist
The World Today - Thursday, 19 October , 2006 12:22:00
Reporter: Eleanor Hall (www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2006/s1768933.htm)
ELEANOR HALL: Harlan Ullman, A key US military strategist who counts the former Secretary of State, Colin Powell, among his students is now at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies.
HARLAN ULLMAN: We lost control of events on the ground probably in April or May of 2003. And it's taken a long time for that recognition to dawn in the White House.
The President and the administration has refused to recognise reality. Iraq is a disaster. It is a disaster at every level, and to think that they've got a functioning government and to think that the situation is better today than it was in 2003 or 2004, or 2005, is unbelievable.
We have a catastrophe on our hands and of course we've got to make course corrections and the only guy in town who seems not to be able to recognise that, sadly, is the President.
And so under these circumstances, it's very difficult to move forward because of the power of the President, and how you get the President to change his or her mind, in this case his mind, is extremely difficult.
But of course we're on a stupid course, but that doesn't mean that we are going to change it quickly enough to make a difference.
ELEANOR HALL: Does the democracy goal stand any hope of being fulfilled? I mean, Mr Bush and his allies, like Australia's John Howard still do point to elections being successfully held there.
HARLAN ULLMAN: I have a huge respect for John Howard. I think he's a great Prime Minister. But he's not naive, and I think he's supporting the administration... if you took a vote in Australia today about the chances of democracy in Iraq, I suspect that the percentage of people who would agree with that, are about the same percentage of people who expect to fly to the moon tomorrow.
It's just not conceivable, it is not feasible, probably in our lifetime. We should have understood that from the beginning, but we haven't, and what we have to do now is limit the damage in Iraq, so it does not spill over the borders and create a further catastrophe in the Middle East, which we cannot contain.
ELEANOR HALL: Now, you're saying that a change in the Iraq policy is essential. What do you know of the new strategies likely to be recommended by this Iraq study group, led by James Baker?
HARLAN ULLMAN: I know the people on the group, they are rational, and they are smart. And anybody who has looked at this, who is rational, smart and objective, understands that we are losing, that we have to change things, that we have to change our strategy, we have to take American, British, Australian troops out of the line of fire, get them out of Baghdad, get them out of Basra. It's up to the Iraqis.
We know what we have to do is to defend the sovereignty of Iraq, that is the borders, we've got to train, but it's up to the Iraqis. We also have to have a regional conference on Iraq with all the powers, we've got to talk to Iran, and we've got to talk to Syria. Question is, how do you get the President to listen?
ELEANOR HALL: Well, indeed. I mean, let's take the suggestion that the US should seek assistance from Syria and Iran. The Iraqi President has agreed that this could help to end the violence, but can you see the Bush administration agreeing to open a diplomatic front with these two states on Iraq?
HARLAN ULLMAN: No, and that's the problem, because the President is going to hold and is going to say I've got to stay the course and I can't talk to members of the axis of evil. This is the issue.
I mean, George Bush will not change his mind, he's the President. Iraq, the government there, is divided along ethnic lines, it cannot control the militias, it cannot control anything.
And so to say we can't change our course means that we're going to lose this. And what I mean by "lose" is that Iraq becomes a chaotic state, and that chaos extends throughout the greater Middle East. And all of us will suffer for it.
ELEANOR HALL: If James Baker can't convince the President to change, I mean, he's someone with credentials from working with the President's father, then…
HARLAN ULLMAN: That's the problem. James Baker is not well received by George W. Bush. Brent Scowcroft, Colin Powell, Jim Baker, they worked for his father. And they are rational, they are pragmatic, and they are right. And their views butt directly against the President's.
So, it is tough, even though Jim Baker was instrumental in helping George Bush win the (inaudible) and gain the presidency, I think that there is little friendship in that area.
And what you're saying to the President of the United States, somebody who's got a huge ego, who is very, very, very stubborn, "you are wrong". And George Bush does not want to admit he's wrong.
ELEANOR HALL: What about the simple and tragic and reality of the number of deaths of Americans? I mean, is a phased withdrawal something that the President may be able to live with, and how would that work?
HARLAN ULLMAN: Let me be very cynical. We lost 58,000 Americans in Vietnam. So far, we've lost less than 3,000. And I think people are going to say, we can afford 70 Americans, 80 Americans, 100 Americans a month. That's the cost of doing business. I find that repugnant and derelict, but from a political perspective, the public won't like, it but those numbers are not painful enough.
ELEANOR HALL: And that's Harlan Ullman from the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, speaking to me from Washington.
|
|
http://zfacts.com/p/537.html | 01/18/12 07:20 GMT
Modified: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 19:38:07 GMT
|
|
