Farewell Iraq, more or less

The Americans are reported to be abandoning plans to leave troops in Iraq after the end of the year, with the exception of the Embassy’s usual (and in this case large, more than 150) complement for “defense cooperation” and occasional training missions.

Why do I not quite believe this?  First, because training missions can last a long time.  Second because no one is talking about the substantial numbers of contractors who will need to be in Iraq to support military sales (like the F16s).  And third because a lot of the counter-terrorism cooperation with Iraq is presumably done by the CIA, which doesn’t put out press releases about it.

Still, it is a major development that Iraq will be without overt foreign fighting forces on its territory for the first time in more than eight years.

Is it a good thing?  There are people in Washington concerned that this more or less complete withdrawal will open the door to greater Iranian influence.  And there are Iraqis–many in Kurdistan but also some in Anbar, Ninewa and elsewhere–who think it would have been a good thing for the Americans to stay.  Kurds, Christians and many Sunnis see the American presence as protection.

But this “decision,” if we can call a failed negotiation a decision, is positive in other ways.  It was taken on the Iraqi side under popular pressure–Prime Minister Maliki is reported to have thought he couldn’t get approval to extend an American presence through the parliament.  I’d call that kind of decisionmaking democratic, which is not a word many people are using today to describe Maliki’s Iraq.  Without American troops, the Iraqis will have to bear the full brunt of the responsibility for keeping the country stable, including by confronting the Iranians if they overstep.  No more Uncle Sam will take care of it for you.

Will the Iraqis be up to the challenge?  I don’t pretend to know, but they are certainly more capable than at any time in the past eight years.  Bad things still happen in Iraq, on a more or less daily basis.  But security has improved, oil production is up, services are marginally better and people are worried about corruption, which is one of my personal indicators that the worst of the physical violence is coming to an end.

What is not clear is how long they’ll keep the more or less democratic system of governance we bequeathed them.  Maliki shows signs of grabbing for power by appointing army commanders loyal to him personally, ignoring the parliament, pressuring the constitutional court and stiff-arming both his coalition partners and the opposition.  His ungenerous reaction to Iraqi protesters calling for better services and more democracy, as well as his support for Bashar al Assad, have raised a lot of eyebrows.

Iraqis should bear the responsibility for ensuring that the democratic system prevails.  Keeping it propped up with American troops was helping Maliki consolidate his position, and seemed to provide precious little leverage over his decisions.  I find it hard to believe that either Kurds or Sunnis will accept a Shia autocracy, and there are lots of Shia who will object as well.  Iran will not find Iraqis any easier to push around than the Americans did.  Maybe it is time to take off the training wheels altogether and hope for the best.  We’ve got a lot of other things to worry about.