Violence and chaos cannot be explained because there always are more than one conflicting causes to breed them, however, in case of Iraq it is far from being difficult to point finger towards the original cause: Mr. George W. Bush.

He has the singular dubious honour of being the first President in American history to flounder nation’s resources so heartlessly to create death and destruction at such a gigantic level in Iraq and Afghanistan  directly and in Lebanon and Palestine indirectly, though many do contend this assertion and directly blame Bush for what is happening in Lebanon and Palestinian Occupied Territories as well.

In Iraq the US military surge has not worked so far although all 16 intelligence agencies have predicted that Iraq’s security will ‘improve modestly during the next six to 12 months.

’ If anyone hears Bush speaking on Iraq will get the idea that America is fighting a war of terror in Iraq and doing its utmost to eliminate Al- Qaeda with which it is fighting a war of ideals: as if it is the only destabilising factor in Iraq.

Such oversimplification of Iraq’s problems leaves everyone flabbergasted  and helps in no way build confidence in Bush’s leadership: hence his ranking in all polls tumbling on daily basis. In sheer desperation and anger Bush accuses everyone else for Iraqi mess but himself. Added to this is his sense of self-righteousness that has compounded any reading on the future of Iraq. His rhetorics are not dying as well.

Speaking at the Veterans of Foreign National Convention in Kansas City on 22nd August he said, ‘the price of America’s withdrawal (from Vietnam) was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like ‘boat people’, ‘re-education camps’ and ‘killing fields.’

He is yet against the first President who would draw such lessons from  Vietnam. Glossing over bad patches of history is pardonable but its outright distortion is an outrageous crime that cannot be forgiven. America had not withdrawn its forces from Vietnam willingly. It was kicked on its ass and was hurled head over heal to push its forces out of the country.

It left behind a long streak of war legacy of anti human land mines,chemical agents, displaced and distressed peoples in the millions, economy in complete shambles, social and political structure torn asunder: humanitarian crisis of gargantuan dimensions. Brave nation of Vietnam has since then been grappling with the problems cause by the US intervention.

There are many similarities between Iraq and Vietnam that Bush should notice and get inspiration to plan out an exit strategy. Getting out of a quagmire does not lead to any crisis, staying the course often leads to greater disruption and instability.

Firstly, America has attacked the country and tried to subdue the people,  hence does not have any moral ground to win the sympathies of the popula-tion. He is an uninvited guest who has been asked to leave the country.

Secondly, in terms of civilian loss in both conflicts the figure runs into millions with a great majority being innocent men, women and children.

Thirdly, as it happened in case of Vietnam, some people are making a lot of money. Corruption scandals are beginning to appear. The US arsenal factories have got new lease of life and are churning out armaments on gigantic level.

Fourthly, never a serious attempt was made to address the real problems of the country. Anthony H. Cordesman from the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington claims, the policies of the United States in the post-war period, particularly Paul Bremer’s, are to a great extent  responsi-ble for the undermining of the Iraqi state.

Just two days before he resigned as defense secretary, Donald H. Rumsfeld admitted flaws in the US policies that according to his acknowledgement were not working. He submitted a classified memo to the White House that recognized that the Bush administration’s strategy in Iraq was not working and called for a major course correction.

“In my view it is time for a major adjustment,” wrote Mr. Rumsfeld, who has been a symbol of a dogged stay-the-course policy. “Clearly, what U. S. forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough.” Instead of focusing on problems at hands in the country the US embarked upon a regional agenda that had no prospects for success. Now as the disenchanted population has turned against the US it finds it convenient to blame Iraqi neighbours whose interests are best served if normalcy has returned to that country.

Fifthly, since the initial euphoria when President George W. Bush declared “mission accomplished” on May 1, 2003, aboard an aircraft carrier anchored in the Pacific Ocean thousands of American soldiers have been and killed and most of the others left behind want to go home. The situation is so messed up that the US is increasing its military presence whereas its allies are leaving for home. There is also clash of visions: two British generals have openly disagreed with the US on its style of handling Iraq.

The US has been playing one group against the other to extend its stay in Iraq, thereby, extremely eroding Iraq’s political and social institutions as well as its religious and ethnic harmony. In a latest ruse reportedly former Iraq Prime Minister Allawi is being promoted against Maliki who lately had showed some independence and come in the open against US highhandedness as occupation force. Reportedly Allawi has hired the Washington firm of Barbour, Griffith & Rogers on a six-month lobbying  contract for $300,000.

The firm includes Robert Blackwill, Bush’s former envoy to Iraq who helped form the Allawi-led interim government in 2004, and Philip Zelikow, a former advisor to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. No such tactics worked in Vietnam and none will work in Iraq.

Sixthly, Iraq is going to cost Republican US presidency quite in line with Vietnam prognosis. The Republican presidential hopefuls are banking on Mr. Bush to linger on with the problem till the end of elections so that in case of progress in Iraq some votes can be encashed. It is nothing lessthan a bargain in human blood.

For the first time last October New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman opined that the current violence in Iraq was ‘the jihadist equivalent of the Tet offensive’. Forces opposing the occupation had lost the Tet offensive, but it was a major propaganda victory and is widely considered a turning point of the war in Vietnam, prompting support for the conflict to deteriorate. President Lyndon Johnson’s popularity fell and he withdrew as a candidate for re-election in March 1968: now Iraq has really ditched Bush and his Republicans.



Information

There are many similarities between Iraq and Vietnam that Bush should notice and get inspiration to plan out an exit strategy. Getting out of a quagmire does not lead to any crisis, staying the course often leads to greater disruption and instability. 

First appeared in Pak Observer on 13th Sept., 2007