Current Article

Nonsense from O’Hanlon and Pollack

By Larry Johnson on July 30, 2007 at 3:41 PM in Current Affairs

by
Larry C Johnson

The Sunshine boys, Michael O’Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack, are out today with patent nonsense that the mainstream media will lap up–We Are Winning in Iraq.

According to O’Hanlon and Pollack in today’s New York Times:

Here is the most important thing Americans need to understand: We are finally getting somewhere in Iraq, at least in military terms. As two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration’s miserable handling of Iraq, we were surprised by the gains we saw and the potential to produce not necessarily “victory” but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with.

Yes sirree. That O’Hanlon is one tough analyst and critic. Here’s what he told the Voice of America in March 2005:

The last year in particular has seen, first, a great intensification of the insurgency but, at the very end of it, perhaps a slight reduction in its strength and its lethality. And of course, then, the preparation for the elections, which took place in early 2005 and, essentially, commemorated the end of the second year and finished it on a much more positive political note. So we see an economy that’s still struggling, although gradually improving. We see Iraqi security forces that are still in their very fledgling state, although at least starting to get better. And we see a political process that is far from resolved, but at least hopeful.

So if you’re a pessimist or an optimist, either way, you have a lot of evidence to back up your view about how things have gone this last year in Iraq.

Be assured of one thing, O’Hanlon and Pollack did not freely travel around Iraq and did not travel without a security team. Their eight day visit and upbeat assessment ignores other plausible explanations:

1. The slowing of body counts in Baghdad is not a consequence of less sectarian strife; instead, the effectiveness of the death squads and ethnic/sectarian cleansing has reduced the number of targets.

2. Moqtada al Sadr’s control of police and intelligence organs is pretty extensive. He’s biding his time and smartly avoiding a direct confrontation with US forces. There is zero evidence that Moqtada is backing down or backing away.

3. The Sunni controlled forces are doing a better job of defending their sectors. That is true. But Al Qaeda is not the main threat and never has been. But the units in charge in the Sunni sectors out west are not ready and willing to join arm-in-arm with Shia units and work for the benefit of Iraq.

There are significant changes underway in Iraq that are going to hamper the movement and operations of U.S. forces. Last year, for example, when the U.S. tracked and killed Abu Musab Al Zarqawi we did not have to coordinate in advance with the Iraqi government. That operation was carried out independently of the the Iraqi government and security forces. Even with that freedom of movement, when our forces showed up on scene after dropping a bomb on Zarqawi the Iraqi police (Sunnis) were already there trying to gather up Zarqawi and get him to a hospital. Even under those so-called optimal conditions we could not trust the Iraqi security forces to be completely transparent with us.

Today we have less freedom of movement and it is going to get worse, not better. For example, US forces moving into contested areas in Baghdad must provide advance notice to Iraqi police (IP) and/or the Iraqi Army (IA). At a minimum that increases the likelihood that an operation will be compromised. It also means that Iraqi forces will protect the insurgent forces and individuals loyal to them while giving us free access to blast away at those forces they themselves want to see eliminated.

The days of free fire zones are coming to an end. (This applies to contractors as well.) We will see a gradual decline in U.S. casualties as the number of combat patrols diminish and we avoid attacking the centers of power of entrenched militia like the Mehdi Army and the Badr Brigade. But the end result is still a country fragmented into sectarian regions and not under the control of a central government.

The problem with the current surge strategy is that we are still following a plan that has us fighting both Sunni and Shia elements in different parts of the country. Oh yeah. We’re also fighting the Iranians. The fact that Sunni sheiks in Ramadi are banding together to fight outsiders does not mean they have decided to support Prime Minister Maliki and his government.

It is worth noting that despite our increased presence in Baghdad the ethnic purge is steadily marching on. Just check out these reports from the last week:

07/27/07 Reuters: Twenty-five bodies were found dumped across Baghdad in the past 24 hours, police said. Seven police commandos killed by a roadside bomb in Samarra. Seven police commandos were killed by a roadside bomb in Samarra, 100 km (60 miles) north of Baghdad, police said. The police patrol then opened fire, killing three civilians.

07/28/07 AP: Car bomb kills at least four in Baghdad. An area in the heart of Baghdad frequently struck by suspected Sunni insurgents has been hit again. At least four people are dead and ten others wounded from a noontime bombing today. Police say the explosives were in a parked car…

07/29/07 Reuters: 20 bodies found in Baghdad on Saturday The bodies of 20 people were found in different areas of Baghdad on Saturday, police

07/30/07 AP: Insurgents attacked village south of Baqouba, killing 20 civilians
Northeast of the capital, dozens of suspected Sunni insurgents attacked a Sunni village south of Baqouba, killing 20 civilians and kidnapping others for not cooperating with them, a local police official said.

07/30/07 Reuters: 25 bodies found in Baghdad
Twenty-five bodies were found dumped across Baghdad in the past 24 hours, police said.

I would be impressed if we saw the perpetrators of these attacks being apprehended and punished. But that’s not happening. The task of carving Iraq up into sectarian safehavens is well advanced and continuing in part with our unwitting assistance.

O’Hanlon and Pollack are willing idiots who are happily latching on to the latest Bush Administration propaganda campaign to convince the public that things are swell in Iraq, that we are turning the corner, and that things will turn out okay if we just give it time. If you are eating a dozen donuts a day and sitting around waiting to lose weight I guarantee that you will not lose pounds no matter how optimistic you are. Well that analogy applies to Iraq. Surging US troops will not solve the basic political dilemma confronting Iraq.

Iraq is a country largely under the control of Shia forces that have a close relationship to Iran. The Sunni minority are not going to buy in to this deal. They will continue to fight it every way they can. And to the degree we get in the middle of that fight we will be casualties.

CK

“Sustainable Stability” ok we have this weeks mbaspeak/meme to work with. Continuous equilibrium. Smooth linearization of the violence curve response vector ( just made that one up and damn it rolls trippingly off the brain ), non-accelerated stasis, negative feedback OODA loop continuum, static violence levels with zero growth technical indicatiors.
Leslie

CK,
LOL.

Along those lines, have you ever heard of Schrodinger’s Cat? Basically, physicist Schrodinger put his cat in a box with deadly radioactive particles. In the experiment, the cat was alive and dead in the box at the same time, because in quantum physics there was no way to observe its actual state.

Here’s a little poem:

Dear Cecil:

Cecil, you’re my final hope
Of finding out the true Straight Dope
For I have been reading of Schroedinger’s cat [Iraq]
But none of my cats [the Iraqis] are at all like that.
This unusual animal [country] (so it is said)
Is simultaneously live and dead!
What I don’t understand is just why he
Can’t be one or other, unquestionably.
My future now hangs in between eigenstates.
In one I’m enlightened, the other I ain’t.
If you understand, Cecil, then show me the way
And rescue my psyche from quantum decay.
But if this queer thing has perplexed even you,
Then I will and won’t see you in Schroedinger’s zoo.
–Randy F., Chicago
taters

Good cath and have a safe trip, Larry.
How Brookings allows O’Hanlon to have a gig w/them doesn’t speak very well of them.
taters

Hey, I’m not drinkin’ – honest!
I meant to say – Good catch Larry & have a safe trip.
Why Brookings allows O’Hanlon to have a gig with them doesn’t speak very well of them.
Leslie

Shouldn’t O’Hanlon and Pollack’s bylines read: This has been a public service announcement by the Bush administration’s Office of Propaganda.
shargash

The MSM is portraying O’Hanlon & Pollack as “vocal critics” of Bush’s Iraq policy, presumably in an attempt to bolster the credibility of their report.

I really think the lack of a real press corps since, oh, some time in the 1990s is the #1 reason we’re in the mess we’re in.
bob h

And just what will we have won? Al Qaeda and its franchisees in Pakistan, UK, North Africa, Spain, etc. will still be there with new recruits and weapons training.
bob h

One thinks of Armstrong Williams. Who funds O’Hothead and Pollack for their work on Iraq? Is it possible this was written to enhance the chance of getting DoD contract funding? Wouldn’t surprise.
Delia

And here’s a snippet of a song, courtesy of Gordon Lightfoot:

Sometimes I think it’s a sin
When I feel like I’m winnin’
When I’m losin’ again.

Of course that’s more eloquent than these fools deserve.
Tom S

So the best that can be said is that after four years of futzing around, the US military is finally doing something right in Iraq? Talk about damming with faint praise.
CK

I sold that cat to Schroedinger.
He paid with quantum cash.
You couldn’t tell its value
or whose pocket it was in
Thus I am indirectly responsible for the invention of the Federal Reserve.
jerryb

I,m not sure the media is buying it this time. Wolfie was interviewing O’Hanlon yesterday and actually pressed him about whether or not he was travelling around Bagdad on his own or was he being escourted by the military. He had to admit that his travels were under the protection of the military. Reminicent of McCain and Graham and their little fantasy trip, doesn’t it?
Leslie

Yes, very true CK, but only in this reality.
Leslie

Curious how O’Hanlan and Pollack interviewed all these Iraqis and officials and not a single one has a name. Why would an official need anonymity to praise Bush’s Iraq policies?
Rob

Just sad…. just sad….
mudkitty

What ever happened to sunshine government? I mean, we’re not talking about troop positions here. If someone can’t give candid advice to a president, except in secret, that’s a red flag right there.
Shirin

Tom Englehardt shreds O’Hanlan and Pollack in his introduction to a very important Michael Schwartz piece on the “The Surge”™. I recommend this piece both for what Englehardt has to say, and of course for Michael Schwartz’s excellent analysis. Please read it/

Tom on O’Hanlan and Pollack (emphasis added by me):

“Their carefully cobbled together formula for where it might take American forces went like this: It had “the potential to produce not necessarily ‘victory’ but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with.”…Of course, O’Hanlon’s and Pollack’s ideas about what “Iraqis could live with” and Iraqi ideas on the subject may turn out to differ somewhat.” [Thank you, Tom! That was my first reaction, too, to their incredible presumption in deciding on behalf of the Iraqis what the Iraqis could live with without actually consulting a single one of the Iraqis who would have to live with it (the opportunists, quislings, collaborators, and wannabes living in up in the Green Zone do not count as part of "the Iraqis" in this case). This awareness is one of the reasons I love Tom Englehardt!]

“On the day of the O’Hanlon/Pollack op-ed, a summary report on the humanitarian situation in Iraq by the international aid group Oxfam and about 80 other aid agencies, gave the concept of ‘sustainable stability’ some grim meaning. In fact, the report — which the administration did not rush to pass out to a single reporter — added up to a functional definition of Iraq as a land in a state of unsustainable instability, a ‘nation’ in which an estimated one million families are now headed by widows. From child malnutrition to ‘absolute poverty,’ large-scale unemployment to an almost blanket lack of effective sanitation, the Iraqis O’Hanlon and Pollack didn’t meet with are in a hell on Earth. The Oxfam report estimates that almost one-third of the Iraqi population is ‘in need of emergency aid.’”

“…while Pollack and O’Hanlon met with the “known knowns” in the equivalent of Green Zone Iraq, a brave French reporter, Anne Nivat, spent two weeks living as an Iraqi in a Shiite neighborhood in “Red Zone” Baghdad.”

“From Nivat, you get a very different picture of “sustainable” Iraq, a place, it turns out, where you’re lucky to get 1-2 hours of electricity delivered a day, while the temperatures soar to 130 degrees…”

“The Shiite man, who took Nivat around for her two weeks in Baghdad…told her: ‘My uncles and cousins were murdered by Saddam’s regime. I wanted desperately to get rid of him. But today, if Saddam’s feet appeared in front of me, I would fall to my knees and kiss them!‘”

“In the meantime, of course, the Bush administration — with a helping hand from O’Hanlon and Pollack — continues along a path guaranteed not to create a newly sustainable Iraq, but to prolong Iraq’s unsustainable instability for endless months, or years, or even decades to come.“
Philip Henika

The key word for Brooking’s Institute foreign policy is the military term “engagement”. The key strategy of the Bush Administration re: military intervention and the rebuilding of Iraq is “privatization”. An Iraqi ‘peacebuilding initiative’ in which the basic principle is ‘helping people to help themselves’ – will never proceed as long “engagement” and “privatization” are locked into the Bush Administration agenda.
http://www.liberaltopia.org RS Janes

It would be interesting to find out if these two ‘liberal’ Brookings ‘scholars’ are getting a little under the table.

The news I heard recently on the elimination of Al Qaeda in the western provinces claimed that the tribal leaders had basically told our military to provide them with weapons and stay out of the way. We did and they got rid of most of Al Qaeda. Now, what will those Sunni tribesmen, who all want our occuaption to end, do with the weapons we helpfully provided them?

Then there’s this news from the AP today “Largest Sunni bloc leaves Iraq government.” That means the only ‘coalition’ left in Bush’s Iraqi government are the Shia and the Kurds, and the Kurds want independence. Yep, the surge is working — to make things worse.
samosamo

I wonder if O’Hanlon, Graham, Malkin, McCain, or Lieberman would like to be embedded somewhere outside the green zone. Another case of the 25%ers big mouths still leading our country into the ground.
People, we better all wake up. My hopes now are that it is not too late to get our country back from the corporate lackeys because the new ‘order’ in this country and the world is the ‘elitist’ that are above any laws and accountability. The next go round of elected crap in 08 does not promise to be a help, after all if little w can have all the power why would any of the newly elected crap want to not keep that power so they can profit by it.
http://www.kerago.com Kian

Government Pay Banding…

Maybe, but I’m not sure it’for everyone….