"Ladies and gentleman...we got him!"
With those words spoken by L. Paul Bremer, the King of Iraq, America entered a new phase in the post-major hostilities era of the war on terror, Iraq division. This new phase involves completely disentangling the US from what it has created in Iraq, and to do it by July 1, the deadline for transfer of sovereign power to a provisional government. Among the many projects and previous goals that will be abandoned are:
-the effort to replace Saddam Hussein's socialist economy with a free market system
-the goal of having the Iraqis (the Iraqi Governing Council) write a constitution before the transfer of power on July 1
-the effort to forge compromises with religious and tribal leaders
-the effort to combat insurgency
After not finding the ever-important WMDs, and then claiming that that wasn't so important in the first place, the Bush admin. is now going to tow the line that Iraq has become too dangerous, and it's not worth American blood to try and mediate the crisis which the invasion created.
Who would argue against bringing the troops home? No one. And some are going to stay there even after the July 1st deadline, to continue to fight the insurgents. The question is: should US forces be the ones to mediate the ever-growing civil war that the invasion created?
It's a real Catch-22.
With all of the aid agencies gone from Iraq, and with the limited UN help, I think Iraq is being set up for a truly awful fate after withdrawal of US forces. It may not be Rwanda, but it will surely be something like Bosnia-Herzegovina.