Retired Army General Barry McCaffrey is a man whose equal legions of critics and admirers could fight a pretty decent civil war amongst themselves. Whatever else is said about him, there’s general agreement however that he’s a straight shooter who tells it like he sees it. McCaffrey has returned from a mid-March trip to Iraq to report that the country is embroiled in a low-level civil war of its own.
The eight-page report is sobering reading, especially the front matter, labeled “The Problem”, wherein McCaffrey summarizes the issues of the on-going insurgency, which seems to grow new heads even as Coalition forces chop the old ones off, the internal displacement of sects and ethnic populations, the wholesale emmigration, or brain drain, of the country’s best and brightest, an ineffective civil government whose writ does not extend beyond the capital – and not persistently across the capital – criminal gangs, a malfunctioning police and court system, a weakly equipped, led and motivated Iraqi Army, the increasing operational strain on the US Army and Marine Corps (as well as an additional burden about to be placed on the National Guard in support of the Surge), and the poverty of virtue in the regional neighborhood.
All of this we knew of course. Which is why it seems so strange that the Washington Post has chosen to frame their analysis of the report in such familiar terms, while only glancingly covering McCaffrey’s more optimistic observations and eliding entirely any reference to the critical strategic importance of victory. I’ll paraphrase some of that, starting with a body of the report labeled, “The Current Situation”:
Since the arrival of General David Petraeus in command of Multi-National Force Iraq— the situation on the ground has clearly and measurably improved.
1st: The Maliki government has given the green light to prune out elements of the renegade Sadr organization in Baghdad. More than 600+ rogue leaders have been harvested by US and Iraqi special operations forces with the explicit or tacit consent of the government. Sadr himself has fled to Iran and many of his key leaders have escaped to the safety of the Shia south. His fighting cadres were ordered to go to ground, hide their weapons, take down their check points, stop the terrible ethnic cleansing and terror tactics against the Sunni population, and ignore (not cooperate) with US and ISF forces.
2nd: The US and Iraqi Forces have now dramatically changed their operational scheme. More then 50+ Iraqi Police/Army and US Army Joint Security Stations (JSS) are now being emplaced across the city and extended into the suburbs. The pre-operation planning and rehearsals were superb. The presence of these joint military elements is now becoming ubiquitous across the urban areas. Although many of these small outposts have been attacked‚Äînone has yet been seriously jeopardized. The Iraqi people are encouraged —life is almost immediately springing back in many parts of the city. The murder rate has plummeted. IED attacks on US forces during their formerly vulnerable daily transits from huge US bases on the periphery of Baghdad are down— since these forces are now permanently based in their operational area.
3rd: The Iraqis have finally committed credible numbers of integrated Police and Army units to the battle of Baghdad. The strength of IA, IP, and NP units has steadily gone up aided by clever monetary and troop leader incentives. The ISF formations are showing increased willingness to aggressively operate against insurgent/militia forces. Although there is continuing political interference by politicians of both the Iraqi Administration and legislators— this is clearly a serious urban security operation.
4th: There is a real and growing ground swell of Sunni tribal opposition to the Al Qaeda-in-Iraq terror formations. This counter-Al Qaeda movement in Anbar Province was fostered by brilliant US Marine leadership. There is now unmistakable evidence that the western Sunni tribes are increasingly convinced that they blundered badly by sitting out the political process. They are also keenly aware of the fragility of the continued US military presence that stands between them and a vengeful and overwhelming Shia-Kurdish majority class— which was brutally treated by Saddam and his cruel regime. There is now active combat between Sunni tribal leadership and AQI terrorists. Of even greater importance, the Sunni tribes are now supplying their young men as drafts for the Iraqi Police. AQI is responding with customary and sickening violence… all designed to intimidate the tribes. It is not working. The Takfiri AQI extremism of: no music, no photos, no videos, no cutting of beards, etc does not sit well with the moderate form of Islam practiced among the western tribes. This is a crucial struggle and it is going our way‚Äîfor now.
5th: The equipment and resources for the Iraqi Security Forces has increased dramatically. PM Maliki has pushed to create a larger security force of more than 100,000 Iraqi Army troops. Thousands of armored Humvee‚Äôs, Cougar and BTR-80 light wheeled armored vehicles , and other equipment are now flowing into the force. To my great surprise, the Iraqis are using FMS Sales to execute their capital expenditure program with great effect. This includes transition to all US small arms for M4 Carbine and M16A2 rifle. The ISF training system is beginning to work effectively with their own trainers. The Iraqi training base is cranking out 24,000 soldiers a year from 5 Regional and two national training bases. More than 12 Police Academies are producing 26,000 new police a year. The end goal will be an Iraqi security force of more than 370,000 Police and Army— organized in 120 battalions.
6th: Reconciliation of the internal warring elements in Iraq will be how we eventually win the war in Iraq—if it happens. There is a very sophisticated and carefully integrated approach by the Iraqi government and Coalition actors to defuse the armed violence from internal enemies and bring people into the political process. There are encouraging signs that the peace and participation message does resonate with many of the more moderate Sunni and Shia warring factions. Of course, there is no intent to negotiate with either the extreme Bathist elements or the Al Qaeda in Iraq terrorists. The UK three star Deputy MNF-I Commander ‚Äì (LTG Graeme Lamb) has done a superb job with this process.
7th: US Combat forces are simply superb. The Army and Marine brigade, battalion, and company commanders are the most experienced and talented leaders in our history. Re-enlistment rates are simply astonishing. The joint integration of combat power is extremely effective — but is deemed unremarkable by the involved units. (I found a Marine battalion‚Äîwith all three of its fighting companies attached from an Army battalion.) These Marine and Army combat units rapidly employ synchronized air and ground combat power, use enormous fire discipline, are compassionate with vulnerable civilians, and move with explosive energy and courage when they pin a target.
McCaffrey estimates that we and our Iraqi partners have 36 months to set the conditions for victory: A free, stable and democratic Iraq, governed by the rule of law, which is able to defend itself and no threat to the world or its neighbors. Although he believes that victory is possible within this timeframe – and critical to achieve – the timeline is chiefly political: the current president will be able to fight off constitutional challenges to his Article II powers throughout the remainder of his term, but his successor will have to either cement the win or pull the plug after a year in office. Domestic support for the war has evaporated and will not return.
There is also in McCaffrey’s words the concern of a soldier for his servicemen, and of a general for his institution: The ground forces cannot indefinitely sustain the pace and tempo of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. He fears the consequences of defeat:
A disaster in Iraq will in all likelihood result in a widened regional struggle which will endanger America’s strategic interests in the Mid-east for a generation. We will also produce another generation of soldiers who lack confidence in their American politicians, the media, and their own senior military leadership.
The victory in Iraq – for ourselves and for the Iraqi people – will come with a political and economic effort that walks the top politicians – secular, sectarian and ethnic – back from the brink of calamity, a process that will lead to the creation of a functioning federal state. The Iraqi Army must be adequately equipped and regional actors engaged in a dialogue.
Time is short, the consequences enormous. McCaffrey summarizes:
We have brilliant military and civilian leadership on the ground in Iraq. General Dave Petraeus, LTG Ray Odierno, and Ambassador Ryan Crocker have the country’s treasure and combat power at their disposal. Our cause is just. The consequence of failure will be severe.
The American people hold that the US Armed Forces are the most trusted institution in our society. The polls also show that domestic opinion is not calling for precipitous withdrawal. However, this whole Iraq operation is on the edge of unraveling as the poor Iraqis batter each other to death with our forces caught in the middle.
We now need a last powerful effort to provide to US leaders on the ground —the political support, economic reconstruction resources, and military strength it requires to succeed.
Thirty-six months.



Outstanding analysis as usual.
What made me think of post-revolution/pre-constitution America? All those Torys didn’t move to Canada for the fresh air.
[...] More at AMERICAblog The Heretik, Think Progress and, especially, Neptunus Lex. [...]
After four years, they will never get three more. The question to be asked is why weren’t we doing this four years ago? Too many bad decisions by bad leaders all the way up the chain. Now the country will pay the price. What a case history in how to screw up an iron ball.
I can tell you that my Congressman,no matter how many emails I send him, will ever agree to allowing the military to dictate forces. He bluntly states on his web page that he is against this war and will do anyhing to stop it (short of being given a bribe to prolong the war)
I was absolutely amazed that he voted FOR the legislation that immuned air craft passengers from prosecution… Possibly, he couldn’t go that far as we are in the NY metropolitan area although, I see from the voting rolls that other NY Congressmen deemed the passengers of the flight out of MN as potential false witnesses and deserving of prosecution…
Bill C says: “The question to be asked is why weren?
Bill C says: “The question to be asked is why weren’t we doing this four years ago? Too many bad decisions by bad leaders all the way up the chain.”
I ask: Can you point to one or more people who, on the record, over the last 2 to 3 years, were advocating that we do what we are now doing? My guess is that maybe there is someone, and maybe not. If there is such a person or people, I’d like to know who they are so as to understand “where they are coming from”….were they just right this time because circumstances have now made them correct, or are they real geniuses.
My take on all the criticism that is thrown at the people who have run the Iraq thing, is that it’s just so easy to criticize someone else’s ‘creation,’ specially after the fact, than it is to make the decisions day-to-day. I think that a lot of very smart and educated people have tried their best to get us the results we need….and circumstances and the enemy have made the decisions very difficult – and ultimately “wrong” in the eyes of the critics.
[...] generous H/T to Lex who pointed me to General McCaffrey’s report, a very interesting read. The link is to his [...]
This looks like something that McCaffery did about 6 months ago and was making the rounds on e-mail. It came from a speech he gave to ????….. Looks like he updated it.
Problem is that they don’t have 36 months, they have less than 24………..till Jan 20 , 2009.
Don’t be so sure of that, Skippy. First, even if Bush doesn’t veto the bill he still has constitutional authority to ignore the mandate from Congress, and so will his successor. Given the US legal system, it would not suprise me to find another two years could be added on just in the court case. Second, and more likely, even if a Democrat succeeds Bush, there is precious little incentive for them to just pull out. Inheriting a war isn’t a particularly great way to start an administration, and few Americans see any executive leadership in declaring defeat and going home. I suspect that is why the Democrats wish to set such a firm date, as a damage control policy for the responsibility they might inherit. It’s a lot easier to lose a war when you can say your hands are tied, you have to leave because the law says so, and it was all your predecessors fault anyway. Much easier than exercising your responsibilities as POTUS and doing what you think is right for the country, as an example.
But, as I’ve lamented before, that seems to have become less and less a consideration for folks in public office.
– Max
The bill was not what I was talking about. No matter who wins the election, the new President will have to come up with a “Peace with Honor solution” to the Iraq mess. The American people will not stand for this much longer. However misguided the Congress may be in their approach, I do believe they are echoing the sentiment of a lot of Americans who are tired of seeing their blood and treasure spilled for a bunch of Arabs, who continue to fight over useless things.
Even Mc Cain won’t be able to stay in Iraq. And truth be told he will probably adopt an Eisenhower solution.
Except, there is no China to threaten with the H-bomb. China knew when to push their charges to the table-Iran does not.
[?
[…] More at AMERICAblog The Heretik, Think Progress and, especially, Neptunus Lex. […]
HOLEEE KREP! Now there’s a grouping one doesn’t often, if ever, see! And you get the “especially,” Lex! While Gandelman and company (i.e., the author of the linked piece) claim to be moderate, my experience in reading these guys is they are moderate Left.
Still and even, to be grouped with some of the Lefty Big Dogs just has to be a first…
I know Buck, I had to go back and re-read what I’d written…
Steve C,
I can point to Senator John McCain for one who has advocated a much larger troop presence on the ground, think of it as a “surge”, since the beginning. Colin Powell has made the same point since leaving the administration. Where they are coming from is a good foundation in reality about how many troops does it take to effect desired results. The former secdef apparently didn’t care for that type advice hence there are 7 or 8 former army and marine general officers who now also have something to say about effective troop strength.
You say circumstance and the enemy have made decisions difficult. Welcome to warfare 101. You may have never heard of the rule of the P’s. Proper planning prevents piss poor performance. When we have such partisan politics and an openly hostile press no administration can afford the errors made since May of 03.