"We Americans have to convey to the Iraqi authorities how disappointed we are realizing that they cannot do a better job. As they do not improve their performance, then, with regret, we Americans will have to acknowledge that the Iraqis are not really serious about their security and their future. As the Iraqis are not really doing their share and since we should not do more than what is fair, then this is a lost cause and we should leave them to their own devices."

The parting shot will be: "Hey, we invested heavily. We tried our best, but you cannot keep on helping people who do not want to help themselves."

Another complimentary attitude to this one is that the rapid evacuation of U.S. combat forces from Iraq is not only militarily essential but morally vital because doing so will save many American lives from being lost for no good reason.

It is easy to criticize this latter view. From this standpoint, the primary objective of military operations is not to defeat an enemy so that the United States can accomplish a political goal, but to minimize America's human losses.

If casualties mount and there is no immediate victory, then the U.S. armed forces should withdraw, because no protracted conflict is worth the mounting loss of American lives. According to these military theoreticians, in a war, either the United States can achieve immediately our goals or forget about the whole thing. Apparently no strategic goal is significant enough to justify the sacrifice of American lives.

The former school of thought, more complex and more nuanced, is however equally flawed. The objective here is in fixing the blame, not fixing the problem. It is about scolding and punishing the Iraqis for their failures -- and there are many.

But this view leaves out of the equation the fundamental question as to how the U.S. national interest is best served, regardless of what the Iraqis do or do not do efficiently.

Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama both agreed to the demand of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki that all U.S. combat troops should leave Iraq within a fixed period of time. But Obama has made clear he is going to scale down U.S. combat forces in a methodical manner and that he does not want to instigate a too precipitate withdrawal of them.

Part 4: What message will the United States send to the Iraqi people by the manner in which it withdraws its combat forces from their country?

(Paolo Liebl von Schirach is the editor of SchirachReport.com, a regular contributor to Swiss radio and an international economic-development expert.)

(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)

Share This Article With Planet Earth

del.icio.us	Digg	Reddit
YahooMyWeb	Google	Facebook

Related Links
Iraq: The first technology war of the 21st century

Memory Foam Mattress Review

SPACE MEDIA NETWORK PROMOTIONS Solar Energy Solutions Tempur-Pedic Mattress Comparison ... Newsletters :: SpaceDaily :: SpaceWar :: TerraDaily :: Energy Daily XML Feeds :: Space News :: Earth News :: War News :: Solar Energy News