At the end of a fairly interesting debate on Iraq policy on Meet the Press yesterday, Tim Russert asked Newt Gingrich what would happen if the U.S. set a firm date for withdrawal of our troops in Iraq. The former House Speaker didn’t hesitate.
“[W]atch what our enemies say. If this Congress passes a definitive end of American involvement, every enemy we have on the planet will exalt, and every terrorist group on the planet will claim it’s an enormous victory, and they will increase their recruiting,” Gingrich said. “And as New Jersey should just have taught us, they don’t plan to stop in Baghdad.”
Now, the notion of connecting the Fort Dix Six with the war in Iraq is sophomoric, even by Gingrich’s low standards. But the point that stood out for me was the notion that our withdrawal from Iraq will somehow be a boon for our enemies. (I wrote about this yesterday for TPM, but wanted to flesh this out in a little more detail here this morning)
Predictably, Gingrich has the story backwards. It wasn’t too long ago that al Qaeda was considered cash-strapped. More recently, however, the CIA, in the midst of an unsuccessful search for the terrorist network’s top leadership, noticed a new problem: the war in Iraq is helping fill al Qaeda’s coffers.
In one of the most troubling trends, U.S. officials said that Al Qaeda’s command base in Pakistan is increasingly being funded by cash coming out of Iraq, where the terrorist network’s operatives are raising substantial sums from donations to the anti-American insurgency as well as kidnappings of wealthy Iraqis and other criminal activity.
The influx of money has bolstered Al Qaeda’s leadership ranks at a time when the core command is regrouping and reasserting influence over its far-flung network. The trend also signals a reversal in the traditional flow of Al Qaeda funds, with the network’s leadership surviving to a large extent on money coming in from its most profitable franchise, rather than distributing funds from headquarters to distant cells.
A senior U.S. counter-terrorism official added, “Iraq is a big moneymaker for them.”
This isn’t exactly a huge surprise, but it’s nevertheless a heartbreaking reminder of the extent to which the administration and its allies are making things worse. Indeed, we learned last September from the National Intelligence Estimate that the war is “shaping a new generation of terrorist leaders and operatives,” creating a “cause celebre” for jihadists, which in turn “cultivat[es] supporters for the global jihadist movement.” Or, put another way, the war in Iraq is making it harder, not easier, to combat global terrorism, and in the case of al Qaeda, our presence has become something of a cash-cow for our enemies.
I heartily endorse Kevin Drum’s take on the broader dynamic.
Say it with me: We. Need. To. Get. Out. The sooner the better. Our presence in Iraq is doing nothing for Iraq itself, which is doomed to sectarian civil war no matter what we do. It’s actively hindering the destruction of al-Qaeda in Iraq, which will almost certainly proceed more quickly and more ruthlessly once we leave. It’s made Iran into a more powerful regional player than it ever could have dreamed of. It’s produced a relentlessly worsening foreign policy catastrophe by swelling the ranks of Middle Eastern Muslims who support anti-American jihadism in spirit, even if they don’t directly support al-Qaeda itself. And it’s turned into a bonanza of recruiting and fundraising among those who do directly support al-Qaeda.
In almost every way you can think of, our continued presence in Iraq is bad for Iraq, bad for the Middle East, and bad for America’s own national security. I can’t even think of anything on the plus side of the ledger anymore, and every additional day we stay there only makes the ledger look worse.
As for Gingrich’s claim that we should “watch what our enemies say,” this is folly — for two reasons. First, if we do listen to what our enemies say, and act accordingly, we’d withdraw quickly. Just two weeks ago, al Qaeda’s number two man, Ayman al Zawahiri, said he was anxious for the U.S. to stay in Iraq so that he can target more Americans. For that matter, last fall, a private letter between senior al Qaeda leaders declared their “most important” goal was “prolonging the war” in Iraq.
And second, this is a fool’s errand anyway. As Digby explained, “Basing your decisions upon your stated enemy’s threats and taunts and holding fast so they can’t yell ‘psych!’ is not a foreign policy — it’s a WWF advertising campaign.”
In either case, the decisions made by the Bush administration are helping fulfill the dreams of our enemies. The Manchurian White House strikes again.