Back                                         Iraq: When Should US Troops Leave?

                                                                                                                       February 05, 2008

                                                                                                                      By Stephen R. Shalom

 

 
Everyone who isn't a total flunky of the Bush administration knows that the war in Iraq has been based on lies.
 
In fact, according to a recent study by the Center for Public Integrity and the Fund for Independence in Journalism, in the two years following 9-11 top administration officials told 935 lies about the national security threat posed by Iraq.1
 
But many people of good will wonder: even if the war was the result of lies, even if the US invasion was unjust and illegal, what do we do now? Does the "Pottery Barn rule" so often mentioned by Colin Powell -- we broke it, we own it -- apply. And if we own it, what do we do with it?
 
Well, in fact the Pottery Barn denies it has such a rule, but in any case the so-called Pottery Barn rule has no moral standing. The colonial powers ravaged Africa: but that didn't give them the right to own it and decide its future. The Soviet Union invaded Hungary and Czechoslovakia, but this didn't give them right to decide the fate of those countries.
 
As Noam Chomsky has noted, an invader has no rights, only obligations.2 The only people with rights in Iraq are the Iraqi people. What do they think should happen? This ought to be at least the starting point for our inquiry.
 
Now the problem of course is that it's not so easy to ascertain the views of Iraqis -- after all, Iraq today is a non-functioning society, in the midst of massive violence, with more than one out of every seven Iraqis displaced -- either within the country or as a refugee. Town meetings are not easily organized in Iraq. Participatory democracy doesn’t flourish amidst car-bombs and air-strikes.
 
Nevertheless, we do have some indication of what Iraqis think. For example, focus groups of Iraqis were organized for the U.S. military this past November. According to a report in the Washington Post, which was able to obtain a summary of the results,
 
"Iraqis of all sectarian and ethnic groups believe that the U.S. military invasion is the primary root of the violent differences among them, and see the departure of 'occupying forces' as the key to national reconciliation...."3
 
Pentagon analysts said they thought this was good news because it indicated that Iraqis held some "shared beliefs" that might eventually allow them to surmount the divisions that have led to a civil war. It is indeed good news for Iraqis, but needless to say it's not much of an endorsement of the US military presence.
 
We don't have many details of the focus group findings, but there have been a variety of public opinion polls that have been carried out in Iraq -- by different polling companies -- that are consistent with one another and with the US military focus group results.
 
If you look at the tables I distributed, you'll see (in Table 1) that as of the latest poll in August 2007, 47 percent of Iraqis want US forces to leave immediately4; more than half of the Arab population -- that is, the Sunni Arabs and the Shia Arabs, excluding the Kurds -- supports immediate withdrawal,5 and the Kurds of course are the one group who do not have US troops in their region. The sentiment in favor of withdrawal is strongest in Anbar province, where US officials are so proud of their new relationship with some Sunni tribes.6 Table 2 shows that 79 percent of the population, including 84 percent of the Shiite Arabs and 98 percent of the Sunni Arabs, oppose the presence of "coalition" forces in Iraq.
 
 

 

Table 1: Iraqi Public Opinion, August 2007
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
How long do you think US and other coalition forces should remain in Iraq? They should:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
8/24/2007
3/5/2007
11/22/2005
 
All
Sunni
Shiite
Kurd
All
Sunni
Shiite
Kurd
All
Leave now
47
72
44
8
35
55
28
11
26
Remain until security is restored
34
27
38
36
38
41
39
28
31
Remain until the Iraqi government is stronger†
10
*
10
28
14
3
18
28
19
Remain until the Iraqi security forces can operate independently
7
1
6
18
11
1
13
24
16
Remain longer, but leave eventually
2
0
1
8
2
*
2
7
3
Never leave
*
0
*
2
1
0
*
2
1
No opinion
*
*
*
1
*
0
*
*
4
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
* Less than 0.5 percent.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
† In 2005, "Remain until the Iraqi government elected in December is in place"
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Source: ABC NEWS/BBC/NHK POLL – Iraq: Where Things Stand, Embargoed For Release After 7 a.m. Monday, Sept. 10, 2007, Iraqis’ Own Surge Assessment: Few See Security Gains, Question 21, pp. 25-26, http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/1043a1IraqWhereThingsStand.pdf
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Table 2: Iraqi Public Opinion, August 2007
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Do you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose the presence of coalition forces in Iraq?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
--------Support--------
---------Oppose--------
No
 
NET
Strongly
Somewhat
NET
Somewhat
Strongly
opin.
8/24/2007
21
5
16
79
26
53
*
Sunni
2
*
1
98
25
73
0
Shiite
16
2
15
84
30
54
0
Kurdish
70
21
48
29
20
9
1
3/5/2007
22
6
16
78
32
46
*
Sunni
3
*
3
97
29
68
0
Shiite
17
2
15
83
39
44
0
Kurdish
75
28
47
25
21
4
*
11/22/2005
32
13
19
65
21
44
3
2/28/2004
39
13
26
51
20
31
10
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
* Less than 0.5 percent.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Source: ABC NEWS/BBC/NHK POLL – Iraq: Where Things Stand, Embargoed For Release After 7 a.m. Monday, Sept. 10, 2007, Iraqis’ Own Surge Assessment: Few See Security Gains, Question 19, pp. 24-25, http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/1043a1IraqWhereThingsStand.pdf
 
 
Because these data are from August, the fraction saying that the US surge increased security has probably gone up from the 12-18 percent shown in Table 3. In December deaths were down -- but one of the reasons for that is that huge swaths of Baghdad have undergone ethnic cleansing -- perhaps 700,000 people have fled or been driven out of the capital7 -- so there simply aren't as many potential victims. In January deaths started upwards again, both for Iraqi civilians and US soldiers, but in any case they are lower than in mid-2007. But look at item "c" of table 3, which poses the crucial question: What has the impact of the surge been on the conditions for political dialogue in Iraq. 10 percent think the surge has improved things, 70 percent think it's made thinks worse. And this is true across the ethnic and sectarian divide.
 
 

 

Table 3: Iraqi Public Opinion, August 2007
 
 
 
 
 
As you may know, the United States has increased the number of its forces in Baghdad and surrounding provinces in the past six months. For each item I read, please tell me if you think this increase in US forces has made it better, made it worse, or had no effect.
 
 
 
 
 
Do you think this increase in US forces has made [read category] better, worse, or had no effect?
 
 
 
 
 
8/24/2007
Better
Worse
Had no effect
No opinion
 
 
 
 
 
a. Security in areas where these forces have been sent
18
70
11
*
Sunni
6
89
6
0
Shiite
22
66
11
*
Kurdish
33
43
23
1
b. Security in other areas of Iraq
12
68
20
*
Sunni
5
86
9
0
Shiite
13
64
23
*
Kurdish
22
48
28
2
c. Conditions for political dialogue in Iraq
10
70
20
*
Sunni
1
85
14
0
Shiite
12
66
22
*
Kurdish