That assumes the constitutional process works.

No clear plans exist for its failure or a major step up in the civil fighting. This is now all too possible at both the sectarian and ethnic level, with new problems over defining federal zones and the role of religion in government.

The talk of U.S. withdrawals by U.S. military and Bush administration officials is based on a reasonable degree of political success and inclusiveness, Iraqi military and security forces coming on line in large numbers, and on the assumption that the police will become more effective, hold together, and be supported by an Iraqi government presence in the field. None of these conditions as yet exist, although all are possible.

At the same time, the day-to-day fighting in the west of the country and in major urban areas shows that "possible" is no guarantee of success. Even if one ignores Iraqi political development, the force development goals are extremely uncertain at the moment in terms of time and numbers.

This is particularly true of the ability to follow up military victory by either Iraqi or Coalition military/security forces with a police and government presence.

Yet, success is also tied to creating a much stronger Sunni participation in the political process, and to gradually Iraqi success into tying that political success with the creation of a mix of military, security, and police forces that can establish a lasting presence in key hostile areas like Al Anbar.

The U.S. desire may be to create such conditions by January-March of 2006, but it is all too clear that such political success is at least as uncertain as any success in force development.

There are all kinds of reports about U.S. withdrawal plans and well-defined exit strategies. I don't believe them. None of my sources can give a clear target month for getting U.S. forces down below 100,000 men and women. Some talk early 2006, and most simply speculate. Depending on who you talk to, the politically acceptable figure in terms of U.S. public opinion is set anywhere from "well below 100,000" to 60,000. Pick a number, pick a source.

Just talking informally to U.S. officers and officials, the figure they quesstimate for leaving a capable, but non-force busting, presence through 2006-2007 still seems to range as high 60,000-70,000 maximum, but no one seems to have any clear rationale for this figure or a date to reach it. Levels of 20,000-30,000 men and women seem to hopes rather than plans - usually for dates well beyond 2006.

In short, the United States does not have an exit strategy as much as an evolutionary plan that depends on progress in the Iraqi political process, Iraqi military and security forces, Iraqi police and expanding governance, and dominance - rather than near to mid-term defeat - of the insurgents.

This means we need to be very careful about reading clear deadlines and plans into any of the various statements about reductions and withdrawals being made by U.S. senior officials and officers. If such plans do exist, they may be goals set more by the White House for domestic political reasons than military planners for operational reason.

Here too, however, there is reason to be careful about reading too much into political motives and desires. The Bush administration is going to look more at its historical legacy than the mid-term election, particularly if the polls continue to see Democratic congressmen lagging the president's declining ratings.

Unpopular as keeping high levels of U.S. forces in Iraq may or may not be by the mid-term elections, a precipitous defeat and rush out of Iraq will not help the Republicans.

In short, the Bush administration and U.S. military may know what they want, but they can't control events or be sure of their options. Goals and desires are not a plan.

(Anthony H. Cordesman holds the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the CSIS.)

(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.)

Community
Email This Article
Comment On This Article

Related Links
SpaceDaily
Search SpaceDaily
Subscribe To SpaceDaily Express
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