Closing up shop: American soldiers fold Old Glory after handing Calso military base in Hilla, Iraq, over to Iraqi troops on Sunday. (EPA)
The last American troops in Iraq will fly home by month’s end; whatever the shape of future relations between the two nations, the US withdrawal marks the end of a chapter, if not a whole volume.
In one of those ironies that add spice to history, the end of the American military presence, negotiated under President George W. Bush, is happening under Barack Obama, who built his presidential campaign on opposition to the liberation of Iraq.
Was the war worth fighting? What kind of Iraq do the Americans leave behind? These questions still divide those interested in the Mideast’s complex politics.
A speech by Vice President Joe Biden in Baghdad earlier this month pretended that the war was not worth the cost and the effort, making much of the administration’s desire to end “physical and financial bleeding.” He sounded as if he was ending a war started not by America but by some other, unnamed, country.
Biden also insisted that he and Obama aren’t claiming victory. But was Iraq a defeat for the United States? A draw? In any case, who is the other side?
Apart from the bitter divisions of US politics (of which Biden is a sad specimen), the intervention in Iraq achieved its major goals and must be considered a victory.
The war broke the Baathists’ 40-year stranglehold on Iraq. It liberated 25 million people from one of the most vicious regimes the region has produced. It put an end to Saddam Hussein and his deadly ambitions, which had provoked three wars in two decades.
And, although Biden wouldn’t admit it, the liberation of Iraq triggered the Arab Spring.
It inspired the Lebanese to rise against Syrian occupation and chase Bashar al-Assad’s army out of their homeland. “When we saw the people of Iraq queuing to vote in free elections, we realized that the cause of liberty was not lost,” says Walid Jumblatt, the Lebanese Socialist leader.
This is echoed by Iraq’s President Jalal Talabani. “History will record that the liberation of our country was not only an important turning point in Iraq itself,” he says, “but it was an important beginning for the region.”
Visitors to countries affected by the Arab Spring, from Morocco to Yemen, would appreciate the galvanizing effect that the fall of the most powerful despot in modern Arab history has had on pro-democracy movements.
The liberation of Iraq introduced a concept in Arab politics, that of people’s sovereignty. Arab politics may now begin to revolve around the idea that power emanates from the people’s will as expressed through elections. The traditional idea of political power as the product of palaces, mosques, madrassahs, army barracks, security services and/or tribal “shuras” (councils) now sounds weird.
Iraq’s new democracy isn’t perfect, is under daily threat from hostile domestic and foreign forces and remains fragile. Nevertheless, Iraqis are developing a national consensus in support of democratic rule.
Visitors to the new Iraq know that, despite their great sufferings in the past eight years, the vast majority of Iraqis feel that their world is better without Saddam Hussein.
None of the “terrible things’ that opponents of the liberation of Iraq predicted has happened:
* US troops are leaving in an orderly fashion and in accordance with the timetable fixed by the Bush administration.
* The Americans are not fleeing Iraqi mobs. In fact, many Iraqis, perhaps a majority, wanted the US to maintain a military presence. It didn’t happen because Obama wants to pander to his original base, groups that opposed the liberation of Iraq.
* Iraq has not been divided, as Biden and his friends once suggested, into several mini-states.
* Nor is it a scene of chaos as candidate Obama predicted. Paradoxically, Iraq seems to be the most stable of Arab countries as they are all shaken by revolts of various dimensions.
* Iraq has not been plunged into poverty and starvation. According to the International Monetary Fund, it has the fastest growth rate in the Mideast. The Iraqi dinar is the strongest of the oil currencies.
* The claim that America invaded to “steal” Iraq’s oil has been exposed as the lie it was. In fact, Iraqi officials complain of US oil companies’ reluctance to bid for contracts. In contrast, Baghdad has signed dozens of contracts with oil companies from 40 other countries, including Russia, China, France and India.
* Another lie, propagated by professional anti-Americans, was that the US wanted to turn Iraq into a military base, perhaps for invading Iran. That lie has been replaced with another: Iran filling the vacuum left by Americans. But if the wealthy superpower couldn’t bear the cost of controlling Iraq, how can Iran, a poor and smaller power, do the trick?
Since 2003, at least a million Americans, civil and military, have served in Iraq in various capacities and for varying periods. They’ve done a good job and can be proud of their achievements. Biden may not wish to celebrate it, but for them, and the overwhelming majority of Iraqis, this was and will remain a victory.