No one seems to be writing opinion pieces quite the way I would, so I decided to do it myself.

The name? Taverns are places where one goes to discuss the interesting events and things in the world, so this is my tavern.

I will offer my views on politics, economics, and whatever else strikes my fancy.
I will occasionally publish the entire article from another journal for purposes of causing discussion.

 

Good News - Bad News re: Iraq

Washington Post
Do you want the good news first or the bad news?

OK. Let me give you the Good News. Paul Bremer, the US Proconsul of Iraq, has decided NOT to turn Iraq over to an interim government headed by Chalabi.

"...as a scorching June heat envelops Baghdad, plans to cede power to the former opposition leaders have evaporated. Taking advantage of a recently passed U.N. Security Council resolution that gives the United States and Britain broad authority to run Iraq, the top U.S. civil administrator here, L. Paul Bremer III, said he intends to appoint Iraqis to a council that will advise him on policy decisions instead of endorsing the formation of a full interim government, which the former opposition leaders had hoped to lead. Bremer has promised that the council will include a spectrum of Iraqis and not be dominated by former exiles."

So what is the bad news? Simple. This means that those of us who said invading Iraq would involve a long and expensive occupation were right.

"The decision not to hand over power to the former opposition leaders through a hastily formed transitional government, which U.S. officials here said was made by the White House, means the United States will occupy Iraq much longer than initially planned, acting as the ultimate authority for governing the country until a new constitution is authored, national elections held and a new government installed. One senior U.S. official here predicted that process could last two years or more.

"The idea that some in Washington had -- that we would come in here, set up the ministries, turn it all over to the seven and get out of Dodge in a few months -- was unrealistic," the official said."

The connection with my continued rant that the administration lied to us is this. Much of the 'Intelligence' that Bush and his minions based their invasion of Iraq on (or at least the public justification for it) came from the exiles and especially Chalabi. The CIA and DIA appear to have discounted most of it as unrealistic and self-serving. Rumsfield didn't like that, and set up his own in-house analysis group that did not similarly discount what they were being told.

Rumsfield, Cheney, and Bush knew what they wanted to hear, so when the exiles gave them those answers, they discounted the CIA, DIA and State Department professionals. But the exiles under Chalabi wanted a powerful army that would take Saddam out and put them into power, so the made sure that they said what the Bush administration wanted to hear.

I think I like Paul Bremer. He seems to be realistic and sufficiently ruthless to accomplish the job he has been given. I wonder how long it will be before the Bush administration decides he is taking too long and acting too obstructionist to stay.

Here is a little of what he is facing Bremer, however, has rejected that request, insisting that it would take too long to convene an assembly and that it could be prone to manipulation by former Baathists and radical Islamic clerics. He said he will handpick the council, although he has promised to engage in broad consultations with Iraqis.

In response, one of two Shiite parties among the seven, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, threatened today to boycott the advisory council if members are selected by Bremer.

"If he's going to appoint an administration, we can't be part of that," said Hamid Bayati, a top Supreme Council official. "We will only be part of an administration selected by the Iraqi people. There are certain lines which we cannot cross."

Bayati expressed dismay that Bremer would try to marginalize parties that have pledged to cooperate with the United States and that serve as a link to important segments of Iraqi society. The Supreme Council, which had been based in Iran, is one of the largest parties representing Iraq's politically influential Shiite majority.

"If they sideline the former opposition groups, who are they going to consult with?" he said. "If he doesn't take the view of the seven groups, what other Iraqi groups can replace them?"

U.S. officials in the occupation authority say there are other Iraqis -- who opposed Hussein but did not go into exile -- who could serve as advisers to the United States and as possible future political leaders. As a first step in that direction, Bremer invited 10 more Iraqis to join a meeting on Friday evening with representatives of the seven former exile groups. The additional participants, most of whom stayed in the country during Hussein's rule, included three women, two tribal chiefs, a newly elected local mayor and a Muslim religious scholar.

"Before we got here, we had to depend on the exiles," one U.S. official said. "That's no longer the case."

Nation Building is slow, expensive and not very photogenic for an administration addicted to quick, politically useful cheap projects. The future conflict is very clear.
posted by Richard at 4:42 PM