Bush fights talk of Iraq retreat as rifts grow

Bush fights talk of Iraq retreat as rifts grow
By Guy Dinmore in Washington
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2006
Published: October 22 2006 19:01 | Last updated: October 22 2006 19:01



Talk of failure in Iraq has stalked the corridors of the Bush administration for more than two years, forcing officials to weigh up the broader consequences of a forced withdrawal and the image of a US brought down by its imperial pretensions.

George W. Bush, the president, is still insisting that US troops will not come home “before the mission is complete” but now he is tackling a debate over defeat that has gone fiercely public, exposing rifts within his own Republican party with mid-term elections just two weeks away.

“There are some in Washington who argue that retreating from Iraq would make us safer. I disagree,” the president declared in his weekend radio address.

But using language notably more sombre than in previous broadcasts, Mr Bush acknowledged the enemy was putting up a “tough fight” and waging a “sophisticated propaganda strategy”. In response, the US was always “flexible” in its tactics, Mr Bush said in a nod to growing calls for a change of course. But he did not suggest any significant shift of strategy.

Such was the level of expectation, after a disastrous period that has seen mounting casualties among Iraqis and US forces, that the White House was left denying reports that big policy changes were discussed on Saturday, when Mr Bush held a 90-minute video conference with Dick Cheney, vice-president, Donald Rumsfeld, defence secretary, Zalmay Khalilzad, US envoy to Baghdad, and General George Casey, US commander in Iraq.

Prominent Republicans grumbled on the Sunday talk shows, barely defending the administration’s policies in Iraq and showing little confidence in Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi prime minister.

That the US is seriously losing its influence in Iraq is not disputed by officials. Its biggest weapon is the threat of premature withdrawal – as Mr Maliki recognises – but for the moment at least Mr Bush is not ready to make that move. Speaking to the FT, a senior official said the strategy remained a three-pronged effort built around the Iraqi military, political reconciliation and improving the economy.

There is a sense of frustration that the US is largely on its own. “The international community has to step up if it is concerned about the consequences of failure,” the official said, pointing to Sunni Arab states in the region – such as Saudi Arabia – which have been neutral in their support while expressing anxiety over the rise of Iran and the Shia revival. “They have to encourage moderates in Iraq, not to isolate or exclude Iraq.”

Later this month the UN may complete its proposals for an international “compact” that would see commitments made by the Baghdad government matched by an action plan and pledges of support from the international community.

Mr Maliki, President Jalal Talabani and others had made excellent speeches on this topic, the official said. “This excellent rhetoric needs to be followed up by action.”

While the media is focused on Baghdad, the extent of the breakdown is much wider. The official described the southern city of Basra, where the UK military is based, as an example of the “Lebanonisation” of Iraq, broken up by neighbourhoods and factional divisions, run by local thugs and politicians seeking profit.

Officials do not appear confident they will get a lifeline thrown to them in the form of new proposals being considered by the independent Iraq Study Group.

Led by James Baker, the former secretary of state close to the Bush family, and Lee Hamilton, a former Democrat lawmaker, the Congress-backed group is to report early next year. That might be too late.

In public the White House insists it will consider what they have to say. In private hardliners are rejecting several mooted suggestions – including a phased withdrawal and talks that would bring in Iran and Syria.