The Washington front is the most vulnerable

Amir Taheri:

IN civilian clothes, Lt. General David Petraeus, the newly appointed Commander of the U.S. forces in Iraq, looks more like an academic discussing an intellectual topic rather than a war leader preparing for battle.

However, in an informal "off-off-off-the-record" exchange, over a plate of cheese and grapes and bottles of mineral water in a London restaurant, the general, on his way to Baghdad, showed that he knows what he's after. And that, compared to the contradictions that have plagued U.S. policy in Iraq since before the liberation, is refreshing.

Petraeus begins his mission with three advantages over his predecessors.

The first is his reassuringly deep understanding of the Iraqis, their sensibilities and their complexities. Having picked up a smattering of Arabic over his long tenures in Iraq, Petraeus seems to have also developed a genuine sympathy for Iraqis.

Second: His predecessors - especially Gen. George W. Casey Jr., a successful war leader by normal standards - have achieved much in what matters in the long run: the creation of a new Iraqi army capable of defending the country against internal and external foes. It is in recognition of that fact that the new operation for restoring security to Baghdad will be under Iraqi command.

Finally, Petraeus arrives on the scene at a time when both the insurgency and the Shiite militias are facing major problems.

* Having failed to achieve their "Ramadan Objectives," which included the creation of an "Islamic Emirate of Iraq" somewhere in the ethnic fault-lines west of Baghdad, the insurgents are being sucked into turf wars. They're also losing some funding sources as moderate Arab states begin to disrupt networks that raised money for jihadists in Iraq.

* The Shiite mischief-makers, especially the loose coalition known as the Mahdi Army, are also splintering under military pressure from Iraqi and U.S. forces. Since December, hundreds of Mahdi fighters have fled to Iran - following their nominal leader Muqtada al-Sadr, who is in Qom. More than 1,000 others have been killed or captured.

...

Nevertheless, Petraeus still faces a number of major problems - the most important one being uncertainty in Washington.

There is little doubt that many elements within America's political elite want the United States to fail, for a variety of motives. At least some of those elements would do all they can, short of being charged with unpatriotic behavior, to ensure that the outcome of the war in Iraq is seen as a defeat for the United States - even if it is not so in reality.

...

The one factor that can ensure Petraeus success is the perception that the United States is united in its commitment to the new Iraq that America has helped create from the ruins of the Saddamite tyranny.

The insurgents, the al Qaeda terrorists and the Shiite militias know that they can't win in military terms. What they hope for is to win politically - that is to say, ensuring defeat and humiliation for the United States.

Ayman al-Zawahiri, al Qaeda's chief theoretician, has repeatedly said that the key aim of his so-called jihad in Iraq is to force the Americans to run away, as the Soviets did from Afghanistan in 1989.

...

The battleground where his chances do not appear as good is Washington. The United States today has become home to a veritable industry of defeat - producing books, TV documentaries, research papers, intelligence analysis and feature movies destined for a growing market. Almost every day, some article assuming that the United States has already been defeated in Iraq, and recommend measures to deal with the consequences of defeat. And when the United States does something, it does it Big: The defeat industry is assuming a bewildering scale.

...

Gen. Petraeus is a smart guy. Hopefully, he will find a way to win in the rear in Washington too. That is where his mission is most vulnerable. There are some in the Democrat party desperate for defeat for political reasons. There are many who are actively giving hope to an enemy that he is trying to convince that their cause is hopeless. In Iraq it is, but in Washington the enemy finds hope.