Global Insight Perspective

Significance

The Iraq Study Group (ISG) is a bipartisan initiative bringing together prominent members of Congress, experts and former government officials. Its report was expected to provide a definitive assessment of the ongoing crisis and to give the administration impetus to rethink its strategy.

Implications

The report pulls no punches regarding the problems Iraq faces and warns that many of the administration's stated goals are effectively out of reach. Despite its distaste at engaging with Iraq’s unruly neighbours, the Bush administration will find it difficult to withstand mounting domestic and international calls for a major tactical change. The newly-confirmed incoming Defense Secretary has made it clear that this is what he expects, but Bush has, to date, been equivocal.

Outlook

The authors of the ISG report point out that their recommendations offer no “magic formula” for resolving the Iraq crisis. Rather the ISG report offers, at best, fresh perspectives on how to bring about gradual improvements. The Bush administration appears to have little choice but to accept some of the recommendations, particularly as Congress passes into Democrat control in the new year.

High Expectations

The Iraq Study Group (ISG), a bipartisan task force co-chaired by former Secretary of State James Baker, was charged with providing an independent assessment of the political, security and military situation in Iraq and offering recommendations for countering the stubborn insurgency and sectarian violence. The panel interviewed a vast spectrum of military officials and political figures ranging from U.S. President George W. Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair and former U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, to the Syrian Foreign Minister, Syria’s Ambassador to the United States and Iran’s Ambassador to the UN. As the panel conducted its work, the violence in Iraq assumed an increasingly worrying sectarian dimension, fuelling concerns that Iraq was descending into civil war. In November 2006, the dire security situation was most brutally illustrated by the suicide bomb attacks in the sprawling Shi’a slum of Sadr City that killed over 200 people.

The crux of the ISG's 97 recommendations are a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, and some form of engagement with Syria and Iran. These recommendations have been in the public domain for weeks thanks to a number of leaks, but the full report nonetheless gives fresh impetus to the calls for a shift in U.S. policy. The administration has been under unprecedented pressure to do so since the Republicans were defeated in the mid-term congressional elections, largely on account of public misgivings over the war. In the wake of the defeat, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, a key architect of the Iraq war, announced his resignation. He is being replaced by former CIA chief and ex-ISG panel member Robert Gates. The latter has already departed from the administration's customary line and backed calls for change. His candour was warmly welcomed by both parties in Congress and he was duly confirmed by the Senate yesterday with an overwhelming majority.

Iran and Syria

The most controversial recommendation made by the ISG is "direct engagement" with Syria and Iran to secure their help in stabilising the security situation in Iraq. Both countries exert a visible influence in Iraq; but the concern of the ISG is how to channel this input to a more constructive end. Iran has long-standing religious, ideological and political ties with the Shi’a leadership in Iraq, having offered sanctuary to ruling party officials during Saddam’s rein. In addition, Iran maintains ties to Shi’a militia groups, thought to be behind much of the sectarian violence in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad. Despite international and Arab concern with Iran’s growing influence in Iraq, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani recently called for “comprehensive Iranian help” in reducing the violence in his country. Added to Washington’s distaste of the hardline leadership of President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and concerns over Iran’s nuclear enrichment programme is the disquiet voiced by Sunni Arab regimes of a growing Shi’a sphere of influence—or ‘Shi’a crescent’—in the wider Middle East. Saudi Arabia, which has its own Shi’a community concentrated in the oil-rich eastern province, has been particularly scathing of the emergence of a Iraqi leadership with close ties to Iran.

As for Syria, the United States has slammed the administration of Bashar al-Asad for stoking instability in Iraq and Lebanon as well as its vocal support for Palestinian groups. Senior U.S. administration officials have also charged the Syrian security elite with turning a blind eye to the flow of arms and weapons between Syria and Iraq. Syria, however, maintains that despite its best efforts, policing its porous border with Iraq is not fool-proof. Despite continued U.S. frustration with Damascus, stoked by the recent assassination of former Lebanese Industry Minister Pierre Gemayel—blamed by some on Syria—Syria restored diplomatic relations with Iraq, after a hiatus of more than 20 years, thus laying the groundwork for an expanded Syrian role in Iraq.

Outlook and Implications

Although the ISG report offers no “magic formula” or quick fixes to the Iraq crisis, it does offer scope for a more candid debate that is crucial in reducing the violence in Iraq and finding a long-term exit strategy from the country. The November mid-term congressional elections also provided a wake-up call to the Bush administration that the status quo is politically unworkable. Although the recommendations of the ISG are non-binding, the incessant violence in Iraq, as well as mounting domestic criticism of the administration’s perceived mishandling of the conflict, will mean that it will be almost impossible for the U.S. administration to ignore the recommendations entirely. So far, there has been little official reaction to the report, and the administration stresses that the ISG is only one of a number of bodies conducting reviews. However, there are certainly some signs that some change is in the air, not least from Robert Gates. Recommendations regarding U.S. deployment and renewed efforts to revive the Arab-Israeli peace process will be more palatable, but it seems that either officially or unofficially, Syria, and possibly Iran, will also have to be brought into the picture. As the ISG warns, however, even if the Bush administration does make these changes to its Middle East policy, there is still no guarantee that Iraq will be successfully stabilised and wider conflagration in the region avoided.

www.globalinsight.com

www.wmrc.com