How Obama wants to end the war

For two years during his campaign, Barack Obama spoke about having a plan to end the war in Iraq. Today, Mr Obama announced the withdrawal of most American troops from in Iraq by the end of August 2010. The World’s Matthew Bell reports.

How not to end a war

Interesting piece here from a Nixon insider on how not to end a war.

What, no “victory”?

I couldn’t help but notice the dramatic change in tone in Obama’s speech on Iraq this morning. That’s to be expected, of course, but the missing applause lines and catch-phrases that riddled George W. Bush’s speeches on Iraq and the Middle East were just so glaringly absent. Obama mentioned the importance of viewing Iraq as part of larger strategic challenge for the US. But there was no mention of democracy, freedom and liberation. No mention of Iraq being the central of the war on terror. No mention of victory. The new goal under his administration:

“An Iraq that is sovereign, stable and self-reliant.”

The speech was sober, for the most part, like Obama’s other big policy speeches. It was a measured, careful analysis. And it was comprehensive. He brought up specific problems in Iraq that could derail his withdrawal plan and prevent Iraq from getting its act together.

“But let there be no doubt: Iraq is not yet secure, and there will be difficult days ahead. Violence will continue to be a part of life in Iraq. Too many fundamental political questions about Iraq’s future remain unresolved. Too many Iraqis are still displaced or destitute. Declining oil revenues will put an added strain on a government that has had difficulty delivering basic services. Not all of Iraq’s neighbors are contributing to its security. Some are working at times to undermine it. And even as Iraq’s government is on a surer footing, it is not yet a full partner – politically and economically – in the region, or with the international community.”

Remember that Obama once used the words “dumb war” to describe the US-led invasion of Iraq. That was back in the early campaign days of his run for US Senate. He echoed that sentiment today, when he talked about lessons learned from the US experience in the six-year-old (and counting) Iraq war.

“We have learned that America must go to war with clearly defined goals, which is why I’ve ordered a review of our policy in Afghanistan. We have learned that we must always weigh the costs of action, and communicate those costs candidly to the American people, which is why I’ve put Iraq and Afghanistan into my budget. We have learned that in the 21st century, we must use all elements of American power to achieve our objectives, which is why I am committed to building our civilian national security capacity so that the burden is not continually pushed on to our military. We have learned that our political leaders must pursue the broad and bipartisan support that our national security policies depend upon, which is why I will consult with Congress and in carrying out my plans. And we have learned the importance of working closely with friends and allies, which is why we are launching a new era of engagement in the world.”

So, here was the line Obama had to walk today. Many of the US Marines in the audience at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina have served in that “dumb war.” And they have lost friends in that “dumb war.” And many are on the way back to Iraq to continue the fight. Obama went out of his way to praise them and their fellow servicemen and women for their sacrifice.

“As a nation, we have had our share of debates about the war in Iraq. It has, at times, divided us as a people. To this very day, there are some Americans who want to stay in Iraq longer, and some who want to leave faster. But there should be no disagreement on what the men and women of our military have achieved. And so I want to be very clear: We sent our troops to Iraq to do away with Saddam Hussein’s regime – and you got the job done. We kept our troops in Iraq to help establish a sovereign government – and you got the job done. And we will leave the Iraqi people with a hard-earned opportunity to live a better life – that is your achievement; that is the prospect that you have made possible.”

I started follwing Karl Rove recently on Twitter, and this tweet from him caught my eye today.

“To the surprise of many, BO was handed strong, even winning, hand in Iraq. Hope he doesn’t toss away. Consequences would be awful.“

Imagine that. Awful consequences in Iraq. I’m not sure Obama has the right plan for success, but it was refreshing to hear the president today acknowledge some of the awful consequences in Iraq, such as “millions of displaced Iraqis.” Obama said, “America has a strategic interest – and a moral responsibility” to help resettle them.

The American Influence Podcast #12

Hillary Clinton visits Indonesia. The trip was largely seen as a set-up for Barack Obama’s possible visit there later this year.

Episode #12 of the AI podcast includes an item from the BBC’s Lucy Williamson. She speaks with a few Indonesian teenagers about how they saw Clinton’s visit and what could come out of it.

Also, a long interview with Donald Emmerson of Stanford University about what’s on the US-Indonesia agenda, including economic cooperation, human rights in Burma and the possible Obama trip.

Thanks everyone for writing in about how you get the podcast. I think all but one person listens on an iPod or iPhone and downloads from iTunes. What!? No Zune users out there?

And thanks for listening! Keep in touch: theworldpolitics@gmail.com.

Market drop

The stimulus package, housing assistance plan and bank rescue work-in-progress are supposed to ease economic worries around the world. That ain’t happening yet.

Good economic news

Things could be worse. The US economy is doing better than the economies of Eastern Europe.

In other words, if you set the bar low enough, things don’t look so bad, eh? Floyd Norris has a great story on the front page of the NYTimes business section today about our economy and stock market are not in as bad shape as many other countries. But that’s only if you grade on the curve, he writes. Turns out, the countries that took the most financial advice from the US are hurting the worst right now. But hey, nobody’s perfect.

Now, the bad news. Especially if you own stocks. Markets around the world are still sucking wind. Today’s Wall St. Journal explains the situation this way:

“… The classic sign of a bottom that many analysts and money managers are looking for is a period of frantic selling, followed by a sudden onset of heavy buying. They have seen the selling, but so far, they haven’t seen the buying. The fear is that this means more selling is ahead.“

The GOP likes Hispanics and hip hop

This must have been fun. Republicans got together to talk about reaching out to Hispanic voters. There’s something in the air, because the new RNC chairman is about introduce hip hop to his fellow party members.

Clinton in Korea

Hillary Clinton is in South Korea to talk – mostly – about North Korea. Clinton talked with reporters en route to Seoul today and spoke frankly about something US officials have steered mostly clear of until now. And that’s the Dear Leader’s health and how the uncertainty around who will take Kim’s place is causing concern in South Korea and the rest of the region. As if dealing with the North Koreans wasn’t difficult enough. Now there are huge questions about the stability of the leadership and what happens when Kim steps down or otherwise relinquishes supreme authority. Back in the 1980s and 90s, there was anxiety outside North Korea when power was gradually handed over to Kim Jong-il from his father, Kim Il-Sung. The elder Kim died in 1994 and he’s still “Eternal President,” or somesuch. But that handover was in the works for years. Granted, North Korea is an intelligence black hole, but no one seems to think there’s a smooth transition plan in place. Kim Jong-il has (at least) three sons and a brother-in-law who’ve all been said to be in the running at one time or another. As one Korea expert told me, worrying about succession in North Korea used to be tomorrow’s problem. Now, it’s today’s problem.

I talked about some of this in an interview today with our radio host, Lisa Mullins.

We followed up the interview with a piece from Jason Strother in Seoul about how the Korean language, like the Korean peninsula, has become divided.

American Influence Podcast, Episode 11

Get the RSS feed:

Subscribe on iTunes:

Become a fan on Facebook:

Follow me on Twitter:

Episode 11 of the podcast focuses on Hillary Clinton’s trip to Asia. I had the pleasure of speaking with Yoichi Funabashi from Tokyo. He’s the editor-in-chief at the Asahi Shimbun newspaper. Funabashi explained to me how there’s a sense of relief in Japan that Secretary Clinton is stopping there first on her four-nation tour. But he said there’s also some uneasiness about the signals that the Obama administration has sent about elevating the level of US-China dialogue and cooperation. Japanese leaders, he said, are listening for reassurance from Clinton that Washington still views Japan as its tried and tested Asian ally.

Clinton was asked recenlty about how the Obama administration planned to continue or innovate on the “strategic economic dialogue” begun by Henry Paulson at the Treasury Department. The question came when she spoke at the Asia Society in New York on Friday. Clinton wasn’t specific, but she suggested that economic and trade issues won’t be the only areas where Washington seeks to engage China.

Bruce Gilley of Portland State University says that’s a good thing. I interviewed Gilley for the podcast as well. He covered China for the Far Eastern Economic Review during the 1990s, and he has written several books about China’s new generation of leaders and its politics.

What I didn’t get to in this podcast episode was the Indonesia leg of the trip. But I promise to during the next episode.

If you’re interested in what Hillary Clinton had to say about her trip when she spoke at the Asia Society, here’s a transcript of the speech.

And here’s the interview I did from New York with The World’s host, Marco Werman on Friday, focusing on Clinton’s comments about North Korea and the six party talks.

Carrots for the DPRK

Hillary Clinton told the North Koreans today what’s in it for them, if they give up their nuclear program. She said North Korea needs to town down the heated rhetoric toward South Korea and refrain from any “provocative action.” That last part is a reference to things like the long-range missile test that North Korea appears to be planning at a launch site near the Chinese border. Here’s the audio. //1:30

Clinton did not mention sticks. That is, what the North Koreans would face in the way of punishment if they refuse to abandon their nuclear ambitions. The other thing she did not mention was red lines. Which is to say, at what point would Washington begin to turn to using sticks – such as sanctions – against North Korea.

This is a country that has tested nuclear device, reportedly proliferated nuclear technology to Syria, demonstrated it’s total indifference to the suffering of its own people, threatened its neighbors, tested and sold missile technology to countries like Iran.

I talked with Wendy Sherman recently and asked her about drawing red lines with North Korea. Sherman advised president Bill Clinton and then-secretary of state Madeleine Albright on North Korea policy. Here’s what she had to say. //2:15

Sherman suggests that the US will seize the moral and political high ground by leading a renewed global effort on arms reduction and non-proliferation. Some would call that wishful thinking. It still leaves the tough questions about sticks and red lines unanswered.