What a failed policy looks like

In May, the president signed legislation that funded the war in Iraq, and included a mandate that the administration report by Sept. 15 on whether Iraq is “achieving progress” toward 18 specific benchmarks. It was about establishing some measurable standards of success — meeting the benchmarks would reflect actual progress, falling short would reflect failure.

In July, the White House, after fudging its facts a bit, concluded it was on track on eight of the 18 benchmarks, none of them dealing with political progress, which is the point of the “surge” policy. Today, the non-partisan Government Accountability Office will offer a far more discouraging, far more accurate, and a “strikingly negative” assessment.

Iraq has failed to meet all but three of 18 congressionally mandated benchmarks for political and military progress, according to a draft of a Government Accountability Office report. The document questions whether some aspects of a more positive assessment by the White House last month adequately reflected the range of views the GAO found within the administration. […]

The draft provides a stark assessment of the tactical effects of the current U.S.-led counteroffensive to secure Baghdad. “While the Baghdad security plan was intended to reduce sectarian violence, U.S. agencies differ on whether such violence has been reduced,” it states. While there have been fewer attacks against U.S. forces, it notes, the number of attacks against Iraqi civilians remains unchanged. It also finds that “the capabilities of Iraqi security forces have not improved.”

“Overall,” the report concludes, “key legislation has not been passed, violence remains high, and it is unclear whether the Iraqi government will spend $10 billion in reconstruction funds,” as promised. While it makes no policy recommendations, the draft suggests that future administration assessments “would be more useful” if they backed up their judgments with more details and “provided data on broader measures of violence from all relevant U.S. agencies.”

That last point is particularly noteworthy — the GAO is effectively conceding in a government report that the White House intends to deceive the Congress and the public. We may have come to expect stunning dishonesty from the Bush administration, but for the GAO to call the White House out like that reflects just how reckless and mendacious the Bush gang has become.

As for the GAO’s findings themselves, the report documents a policy that is clearly and measurably failing.

Through smoke and mirrors, Bush and his allies (Kristol, Lieberman, & Co.) have somehow shaped the conventional wisdom to reflect real progress in Iraq. We’re “turning the corner.” The president’s policy is finally “working.” This is no time to “retreat.”

It’s all nonsense.

Overall, the draft report, titled “Securing, Stabilizing and Rebuilding Iraq,” says that the Iraqi government has met only two security benchmarks. It contradicts the Bush administration’s conclusion in July that sectarian violence was decreasing as a result of the U.S. military’s stepped-up operations in Baghdad this year. “The average number of daily attacks against civilians remained about the same over the last six months; 25 in February versus 26 in July,” the GAO draft states.

Iraqi security forces are also assessed more severely in the GAO study than in the administration’s July report. Although the White House found satisfactory progress toward the goal of deploying three Iraqi army brigades in Baghdad, the GAO disagrees, citing “performance problems” in some units. “Some army units sent to Baghdad have mixed loyalties, and some have had ties to Shiia militias making it difficult to target Shiia extremist networks,” it says.

The GAO draft also says that the number of Iraqi army units capable of operating independently declined from 10 in March to six last month. The July White House report mentioned a “slight” decline in capable Iraqi units, without providing any numbers. The GAO also says, as did the White House in July, that the Iraqi government has intervened in military activities for political reasons, “resulting in some operations being based on sectarian interests.” But its discussion of Iraqi security forces is often veiled, as when it states that the determination that the security forces benchmark was not met “was based largely on classified information.”

Not surprisingly, the White House is afraid of the GAO report, and is ready to push back against it.

An internal White House memorandum, prepared to respond to the GAO findings, says the report will claim the Iraqis have failed on at least 13 benchmarks. It also says the criteria lawmakers set for the report allow no room to report progress, only absolute success or failure.

The memo argues that the GAO will not present a “true picture” of the situation in Iraq because the standards were “designed to lock in failure,” according to portions of the document read to the AP by an official who has seen it.

Indeed, that’s exactly why the GAO report was leaked now — the agency wanted the public and policy makers to know the truth before the White House Spin Machine could water-down reality.

In January, everyone endorsing Bush’s surge policy agreed that this was his “last chance.” This had to work, or it was all over.

This isn’t complicated. Nearly nine months later, the policy has failed.

The White House and its allies will say that the “surge” is actually working and that this report is misleading, and that we need just another six months or so to see real progress. The Democrats in Congress will bluster and fume.

But will the Democrats have the courage, at long last, to end this war? It can’t continue without their affirmative vote.

Based on the Democrats’ past performance, the odds aren’t good.

  • Looks like it might be time for Dick to abolish the Government Accountability Office for its “delicate sensibilities” and “emboldening the enemy.”

  • Have had something niggling at the back of my mind for a couple of days, and couldn’t quite put my finger on it. Then it came to me… Iraq = Terri Schiavo. Bush and Cheney are Bob and Mary Schindler (Terri’s parents) and the Dems are taking on the Michael Schiavo role.

    Bob and Mary Schindler sought and paid for medical professionals who would convince them that Terri did have higher brain function, that she was responding to her environment, that if only she could have this treatment or that treatment or therapy, she would one day recover. Michael Schiavo also had medical experts, who believed that she had nothing but primitive brain function, that her open eyes and the sounds she made were nothing more than primitive reflex.

    The Bush contingent is treating Iraq as if any moment now it would become a success. It sees progress in meaningless metrics, and wants us to spend more and more and more money because any moment now it is going to become a model of democracy.

    Like the Schindlers, the Bush contingent just rejects any forecast or report that is negative. Like Michael Schiavo, the Democrats keep insisting that no amount of money, no amount of troop therapy, will be able to make Iraq a model of democracy.

    It’s the right to life fight being played out in large scale.

    The ongoing funding for this debacle is the equivalent of the feeding tube – we’re providing “nutrition and hydration” but for what? Because those in charge can’t face the truth, can’t let go?

    The difference between Schiavo and Iraq is that when Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube was capped, it was only a matter of time before she died – we knew that would be the outcome. With Iraq, we don’t know what happens if we pull the funding – or allocate funding for an orderly withdrawal. Will it be chaos? Will it get worse? No one knows. But not knowing is no reason not to act – heck, back in 2002-2003, there were all kinds of people who “knew” this was going to be the military equivalent of “slam-bam, thank you ma’am” and we’d have zipped up our pants and left $100 on the dresser in less time than it took us to decide which hot-sheet motel to use.

    Like the Schindlers, the Bush gang is using every means possible to sell enough people on hope that it can get more time. The Schindlers cranked up a PR machine, enlisted the right-to-life movement, got Jeb Bush involved, really had a whole propaganda movement up and running. Michael Schiavo was demonized and harassed and threatened with bodily harm and death (I always loved the irony and hypocrisy of those who were so vehemently pro-life that they would advocate death for those who didn’t agree with them).

    In the end, Michael Schiavo, as Terri’s husband, and in accordance with the court’s ruling, was allowed to carry out what the court had accepted as his wife’s wishes, and the feeding was stopped.

    Are we, the people, the Michael Schiavo in this battle? I think so.

  • For these carnage apologists there is still more profit to be taken from the misery of Iraq. This war is one by choice, not necessity, and as such, Bush/Cheney’s big oil constituency has a big stake in the outcome of the Iraqi Oil legislation it wants written to its liking. Until that time, just think how many more consulting fees and no-bid contracts for security and rebuilding of infrastructure have yet to be awarded or fully spent by Bushco. minions!

    Iraq is a mess, and we blame President George W. Bush: end of the debate, and the beginning of anger and frustration – how will this play out in America so many years from now? -Kevo

  • So the Dems will seize this, wave it around, and then collapse because George Bush can hold his breath longer than they.

  • I surely hope that the Democrats got an earful from their consituents during the recess. I surely hope that they have been made ashamed by their hasty exit and capitulation. I surely hope that they now see that their mandate was to rid us of this Iraq mess, and that they are failing miserably at it. I surely hope that the Democrats see that any attempt by this Administration to continue this occupation is pure smoke and mirrors, and is not in our best interests.

    I surely hope. Do we have two political parties in this country? Or are the Democrats DINOs?

    Ball’s in your court, Dems. Get us out.

  • OK, here’s a question…

    If 95% of Democrats disapproved of the way congress is handling Bush and his disastrous war, you might think the leadership might want to think about actually opposing Bush and getting us out of there, instead of pussyfooting around.

    You might think.

    But no, they don’t.

    They really think they can just give us a huge pile of crap and we’ll keep supporting them because we have no other choice.

    Congress faces overwhelming dissatisfaction among Democrats – 95% give Congress negative ratings for handling the war

    http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1352

  • Ned Lamont has shown the way, Racerx #9. Let them all lose their endorsements and run as independents like no-mentum. Exorcise the demons in the Democratic primaries.

  • I’m not 100% sure of the facts but I think two governors and one mayor have been assassinated in Iraq in the last few weeks. Plus a strategic bridge was blown up in Baghdad.

    Doesn’t sound good to me.

  • Yesterday I read that Bush is about to propose another $50 billion for the Iraq occupation. That means the costs of our military adventures will reach $3 billion per week. It’s depressing to contemplate more billions poured down Bush’s rat hole, but it’s worse that, as reported, the unpopular president is pushing new spending because the White House has comfortably concluded that congress will not defeat the demand.

    We’re stuck with Bush. And we’ll be stuck in Iraq when Bush is back having keg parties in Crawford. (Why, why, why won’t the Democrats continually call the Iraq War Bush’s War!!)

    The Democrats’ snivelling and trying to please everybody lost the 2000 and 2004 elections. When will they ever act in the best interests of the nation!

  • Once again, the party that claims it’s best able to “protect” us is the party that lacks the courage to admit it’s wrong and change course — for years on end and with no end in sight. Just make sure when this all falls apart there’s a Democrat in the WH. Cowards, all.

    I’d really like to see someone go over there and ask Iraqis what they want. Three separate states? Fine. We’ll help you set that up and in 12 months we’re out. But no, we keep doing the same thing with minor tweaks here and there, as fires light as fast or faster than we can put them out. Note to Dubya: This is what losing looks like!

    For all the talk about Rove being Bush’s brain, I think we’re about to learn just how good Bush is at lying and deceiving all by himself.

  • It’s the bases. Once they are completed, the troops will magically be ready to redeploy … to the bases. The stalling is all about the bases.

  • One of the failed criteria listed in the GAO report is de-Baathification. I thought this had been a long discredited policy from the Bremer era that was widely viewed as a significant reason that Iraq’s government is failing to function: many of the experienced bureaucrats have been banned from government roles and have become a force behind the restive Sunni insurgency.

    This policy needs to fall by the wayside since many Baathists joined the party as a means of finding government work or to facilitate their career advancement, not for ideological purposes. Prosecute the criminals within the Baath party, but throw overboard a destructive and polarizing policy that will only keep open the social wounds in Iraq rather than letting them heal.

  • I am curious about how Rep. Bryan Baird’s (D-WA) consituents will react to this in light of Baird’s recent reversal in his opposition to the occupation of Iraq. In Tuesday’s Mini-Report CB linked to an article describing a town hall meeting where almost everyone was there to vent at him about his change of heart.

  • I couldn’t watch the Terry Schiavo fiasco because it just made me sick to my stomach.

    The Iraq fiasco I have to watch because it involves so much death but it still makes me sick to my stomach. All Sunnis were not involved in a Baathist run government dominated by Sunnis, just like not all Shiites are involved in a dominate Shiite government that targets Sunnis for second rate citizens. These groups will come to their own agreements out of necessity. The terrorists remain as long as we do because it’s the only place they can kill us on a daily basis. What is really going on here is America is trying to get a strong foothold in the ME and everyone knows it at this point. Bush has become so fixated on the idea of an Americanized Iraq that he is neglecting America’s needs for healthcare, rebuilding infrastructure, our debilitating economic condition. He refuses to face any alternative to his failed policy. A policy which says we’ll feed Americans to the terrorist a few at a time over there so we won’t have to feed a bunch of us to them over here. It’s all propaganda to steal the resources of another country and make a fortune from American taxpayers along the way.

  • Comments are closed.