Who is winning Harry?

Amir Taheri:

...

Reid's new position, however, means that even a Democratic president wouldn't be able to ensure a U.S. victory in Iraq. For him, Iraq is irretrievably lost.

Some antiwar analysts have praised Reid for what they term "his clarity of perception." A closer examination, however, would show that Reid might have added to the confusion that has plagued his party over the issue from the start.

Because all wars have winners and losers, Reid, having identified America as the loser, is required to name the winner. This Reid cannot do.

The reason is that, whichever way one looks at the situation, America and its Iraqi allies remain the only objective victors in this war.

Reid cannot name al Qaeda as the winner, because the terror organization has failed to achieve any of its objectives. It hasn't been able to halt the process of democratization, marked by a string of elections, and it has failed to destroy the still fragile institutions created in the post-Saddam era. Al Qaeda is also suffering from increasing failure to attract new recruits, while coming under pressure from Iraqi Sunni Arab tribes, especially west of the Euphrates.

In military terms, al Qaeda hasn't won any territory and has lost the control it briefly exercised in such places as Fallujah and Samarra. More important, al Qaeda has failed to develop a political program, focusing instead on its campaign of mindless terror.

What about the remnants of the Saddamite regime? Can Reid name them as victors? Hardly. What's left of the Baath Party has split into four warring factions with rival leaders in exile.

...

Reid may believe that Iran, either alone or with its Syrian Sancho Panza, is the victor. If that's the case, Reid shares the illusion peddled by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Convinced that the Americans will run away, mostly thanks to political maneuvers by Reid and his friends, Ahmadinejad has gone on the offensive in Iraq and throughout the region. By heightening his profile, he wants to make sure that Iran reaps the fruits of what Reid is sowing in Washington.

...

That Reid is desperately trying to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory isn't surprising. His party requires an American defeat in Iraq in order to win the congressional and presidential elections next year.

...

If Reid were capable of coherence on the issue of the war in Iraq, he might argue that chaos is the winner. That is the one objective our enemies have attempted to accomplish and Reid appears easily defeatable by chaos although it could be argued that his on thinking on the war is somewhat chaotic. In fact his whole incoherent party is easy to defeat when it comes to military campaigns. It is why they should never be in charge of one.