New Model Hero
One of the true heroes of the Iraq project has been U.S. Army Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, commander of the 101st Airborne. He's the kind of military leader the U.S. needs in an era of nation-building, and he's done just about everything right in running Mosul.
Mosul, far in the north of the country, was not in the path of battle as U.S. troops swept into Baghdad to overthrow Saddam. But in the vacuum of power after the dictator's fall, chaos blossomed in the city. In a sense, it was an extreme case of what when wrong across the whole country -- power struggles among rival tribes, looters, revenge killing, roving armed militias, ethnic clashes.
Petraeus established order quickly and relatively bloodlessly by doing what is said should have been done to the whole nation: he moved in masses of men quickly, used foot patrols to make connections with locals, worked out a power-sharing arrangement among the ethnicities, and spread a lot of money around in good causes -- opening schools, building infrastructure and helping farmers.
However, as this article points out, doing all that right didn't stop Mosul from breaking down into sporadic "spikes" of some of the goriest and most vicious insurgent attacks. Perhaps it's a case of one city not being able to maintain a peaceful occupation when some of its near neighbors are breeding ground for terrorism. But perhaps it's a lesson that, no matter how well the U.S. had done its job in the immediate aftermath of Saddam's demise, the second phase -- the Islamist backlash and the popular frustration -- was inevitable.
Petraeus remains positive about the country's prospects, without being pollyannaish. In an op-ed in this weekend's "Washington Post," he writes, not of "battling in Iraq," but "Battling for Iraq." The preposition is apt.
He lists a lot of numbers. He outlines the progress being made in terms of numbers. Some things that should have been done before (training border guards) are finally underway. Late, but not too late. Michael Moore is wrong. The insurgents aren't winning. We will win, if we persevere.
Our enemy is counting on us giving up and going home. That's our reputation in the world; a weak giant. That's one of the reasons Bin Laden seems to have thought there would be no serious retaliation for 9-11. One of the reasons we get hit hard is the assumption we would rather retreat than fight a long fight.
Yet Iraq is not just an American battlefield. And really it frustrates me day after day to read John Kerry's remarks and see him trash-talk the liberation of Iraq without a word of praise or support for anyone in Iraq who is working to rebuild that country as a free and democratic society. There are tens of thousands of men and women there, risking their lives, and they can't just hang on and wait for a rotation out or a Democratic "exit strategy." It would increase his "presidentiality" to reach out to some of them, to at least tip his hat, and it wouldn't cost him a thing off his critique of Bush's competence.
Yet he seems to regard Iraqis as cardboard people in a Bush Potamkin village, and he seems to regard the violence in Iraq as primarily a U.S. domestic political issue.
Petraeus sees these Iraqis. He sees them every day, doing their jobs, taking responsibility for their futures. He knows they, not any collection of numbers, not any political rhetoric, will be what tips the conflict in Iraq away from the terrorists.
For now, they need us. But someday, the country will be theirs. Their only possibly exit strategy -- and really our only viable one -- is to persevere.
Petraeus and his troops have produced a textbook example of waging peace, empowering the civilian populace, repairing the economy, even sending local kids to summer camp. Mosul had the first functioning city council in post-Saddam Iraq. Petraeus has ordered big signs posted in every barracks: WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO WIN IRAQI HEARTS AND MINDS TODAY?
Mosul, far in the north of the country, was not in the path of battle as U.S. troops swept into Baghdad to overthrow Saddam. But in the vacuum of power after the dictator's fall, chaos blossomed in the city. In a sense, it was an extreme case of what when wrong across the whole country -- power struggles among rival tribes, looters, revenge killing, roving armed militias, ethnic clashes.
Petraeus established order quickly and relatively bloodlessly by doing what is said should have been done to the whole nation: he moved in masses of men quickly, used foot patrols to make connections with locals, worked out a power-sharing arrangement among the ethnicities, and spread a lot of money around in good causes -- opening schools, building infrastructure and helping farmers.
British military officers, who in private are deeply critical of the U.S. Army’s counterinsurgency tactics, single out the 101st as the exception.
However, as this article points out, doing all that right didn't stop Mosul from breaking down into sporadic "spikes" of some of the goriest and most vicious insurgent attacks. Perhaps it's a case of one city not being able to maintain a peaceful occupation when some of its near neighbors are breeding ground for terrorism. But perhaps it's a lesson that, no matter how well the U.S. had done its job in the immediate aftermath of Saddam's demise, the second phase -- the Islamist backlash and the popular frustration -- was inevitable.
Petraeus remains positive about the country's prospects, without being pollyannaish. In an op-ed in this weekend's "Washington Post," he writes, not of "battling in Iraq," but "Battling for Iraq." The preposition is apt.
Helping organize, train and equip nearly a quarter-million of Iraq's security forces is a daunting task. Doing so in the middle of a tough insurgency increases the challenge enormously, making the mission akin to repairing an aircraft while in flight -- and while being shot at. Now, however, 18 months after entering Iraq, I see tangible progress. Iraqi security elements are being rebuilt from the ground up.
The institutions that oversee them are being reestablished from the top down. And Iraqi leaders are stepping forward, leading their country and their security forces courageously in the face of an enemy that has shown a willingness to do anything to disrupt the establishment of the new Iraq.
He lists a lot of numbers. He outlines the progress being made in terms of numbers. Some things that should have been done before (training border guards) are finally underway. Late, but not too late. Michael Moore is wrong. The insurgents aren't winning. We will win, if we persevere.
Our enemy is counting on us giving up and going home. That's our reputation in the world; a weak giant. That's one of the reasons Bin Laden seems to have thought there would be no serious retaliation for 9-11. One of the reasons we get hit hard is the assumption we would rather retreat than fight a long fight.
Yet Iraq is not just an American battlefield. And really it frustrates me day after day to read John Kerry's remarks and see him trash-talk the liberation of Iraq without a word of praise or support for anyone in Iraq who is working to rebuild that country as a free and democratic society. There are tens of thousands of men and women there, risking their lives, and they can't just hang on and wait for a rotation out or a Democratic "exit strategy." It would increase his "presidentiality" to reach out to some of them, to at least tip his hat, and it wouldn't cost him a thing off his critique of Bush's competence.
Yet he seems to regard Iraqis as cardboard people in a Bush Potamkin village, and he seems to regard the violence in Iraq as primarily a U.S. domestic political issue.
Petraeus sees these Iraqis. He sees them every day, doing their jobs, taking responsibility for their futures. He knows they, not any collection of numbers, not any political rhetoric, will be what tips the conflict in Iraq away from the terrorists.
I meet with Iraqi security force leaders every day. Though some have given in to acts of intimidation, many are displaying courage and resilience in the face of repeated threats and attacks on them, their families and their comrades. I have seen their determination and their desire to assume the full burden of security tasks for Iraq.
There will be more tough times, frustration and disappointment along the way. It is likely that insurgent attacks will escalate as Iraq's elections approach. Iraq's security forces are, however, developing steadily and they are in the fight. Momentum has gathered in recent months. With strong Iraqi leaders out front and with continued coalition -- and now NATO -- support, this trend will continue. It will not be easy, but few worthwhile things are.
For now, they need us. But someday, the country will be theirs. Their only possibly exit strategy -- and really our only viable one -- is to persevere.
