By Barry Rubin

If–and I repeat, if–this story is true it is going to be a very big development that may, as they like to see in the television promos, change the Obama administration forever. According to Thomas Ricks, the former Washington Post military correspondent, General Raymond Odierno, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, is asking for an additional combat brigade to be put into Kirkuk and to stay beyond Obama’s August 2010 withdrawal deadline for all combat forces.

(more…)

by Michael Rubin*

After the Iraqi parliament banned 500 candidates from contesting the March 7 national elections, Vice President Joseph Biden rushed to Baghdad to urge Iraqi political leaders to reconsider. While the ban has fueled U.S. cynicism about Iraqi democracy, such cynicism is unwarranted, especially now.

The Iraqi parliament’s decision did not wipe out Sunni candidates. Even the majority Shia lists are multi-sectarian. Iraqis say the controversy is really about rule-of-law and sovereignty issues. Across the ethnic and sectarian spectrum — and even in senior Iraqi military circles — Iraqis consider it likely that there will be a Baathist coup attempt following U.S. withdrawal, even if they disagree about its chances of success. Indeed, it is no coincidence the current defense minister is among those banned by parliament.

(more…)

by Matthew Levitt*

It costs a lot of money to run an insurgency. There are arms to buy, attacks to launch, bribes to pay. The local population has to be won over, and extensive networks have to be actively maintained, often involving members of various groups, criminal syndicates, corrupt officials, and independent operators such as local smugglers. Explosive devices have to be made, guns have to be brought in from abroad, volunteers have to be indoctrinated and trained.

(more…)

by Michael Rubin*

While the Obama administration and congressional leaders may justify renewed engagement with Syria with their desire to jumpstart the Middle East peace process, they ignore the very issue that lies at the heart of the Syrian threat to U.S. national security: Syrian support for radical Islamist terror. This may seem both illogical and counterfactual given past antagonism between the ‘Alawite-led regime and the Muslim Brotherhood, but there is overwhelming evidence that President Bashir al-Asad has changed Syrian strategic calculations and that underpinning terror is crucial to the foreign policy of the country.

(more…)

By Barry Rubin

After watching Middle East politics for more than 30 years, it is clear that these events — and the perceptions of them — move in cycles. At times, developments force a more realistic, and at other times a less realistic, understanding of what’s going on. Sometimes, sadly, it is only when things go wrong that people in the West wake up.

Let’s take some “positive examples,” in terms of negative developments, as examples:

(more…)

by Daniel Pipes*

Highly impressed by the post-9/11 and post-Iraq cohort to enter the field of Middle East studies, I have been predicting for years that by about 2015 the field will begin evolving in a more mainstream direction. The eccentrics and extremists of yesteryear who dominate academic studies of the region will be replaced by individuals with a greater dose of common sense and ambition.

(more…)

by Daniel Pipes*

American forces departed Iraqi cities last week to parades, fireworks, and chants of “Out, America, out!” and “America has left! Baghdad is victorious!”

They left under a Status of Forces Agreement reached in November 2008 stipulating their “withdrawal from cities, towns and villages” by June 30, 2009. In addition, by December 31, 2011, “All U.S. forces are to withdraw from all Iraqi territory, water and airspace.” The SOFA also grants Baghdad control over American military operations and it defines the U.S. role in such areas as Iraq’s economy and education.

(more…)

By Jonathan Spyer

Washington’s decision to return its ambassador to Syria is the latest stage in the present administration’s policy of engagement with Damascus. It relates most importantly to the US desire to secure Syrian cooperation in the build-up to the departure of American combat troops from urban areas in Iraq.

The decision is related to the broader American ambition of drawing Damascus away from Iran. Hopes for a revival of talks between Israel and Syria, and the desire to enlist Syria in the ongoing effort to bring about a rapprochement between the Palestinian Fatah movement and the Damascus-domiciled Hamas may also have played a role.

(more…)

by Michael Rubin*

Today is a milestone in Iraq. Under the terms of the Strategic Framework Agreement, U.S. troops will withdraw from Iraqi cities. In retrospect, however, June 30 will likely mark another milestone: the end of the surge and the relative peace it brought to Iraq. In the past week, bombings in Baghdad, Mosul and near Kirkuk have killed almost 200 people. The worst is yet to come.

(more…)

By Jonathan Spyer

In his letter to Congress announcing the renewal of US sanctions on Syria, President Barack Obama was specific regarding the reasons for his decision.
Syria, the President said, was “supporting terrorism, pursuing weapons of mass destruction and missile programs, and undermining US and international efforts with respect to the stabilization and reconstruction of Iraq.”

These three accusations are related to verifiable activity currently being undertaken by the Damascus regime. Syria’s activity in turn reflects the firmness of the regime’s strategic choice to align itself with the regional alliance led by Iran.

(more…)

by Michael Rubin*

US President Barack Obama’s plan to withdraw troops from Iraq is predicated on an assumption that Iraq’s stability is durable. On 29 January 2009, General Ray Odierno, commander of the Multi-National Force-Iraq, said: “We are getting close to enduring stability, which enables us really to reduce [US military forces].” Advocates of military withdrawal by the United States are optimistic: the 31 January 2009 provincial elections proceeded without much incident.

According to US government figures, violence is down to 2003 levels. Progress, however, has less to do with the governance system, and more to do with key personalities: President Jalal Talabani, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, both of whom met Obama in Baghdad on 7 April, as well as Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani each conciliate crisis and reconcile disparate interests. Without them, stability and security in Iraq may not be sustainable.

(more…)

by Scott Carpenter and Michael Rubin*

Shortly after taking office, President Obama congratulated Iraqis on successful provincial elections. “Millions of Iraqi citizens from every ethnic and religious group went peacefully to the polls across the country to choose new provincial councils,” he declared on Jan. 31. But this was not quite the case. In the three provinces that comprise Iraqi Kurdistan, the regional parliament postponed the vote until May 19. Only recently have plans been made to hold the elections.

(more…)

By Andrew L. Jaffee

“Let me be clear: There is no military solution in Iraq and there never was,” said presidential candidate Barack Obama in September 2007. Eight hours ago, he “announced the withdrawal of most of the 142,000 US troops in Iraq by August 2010… he said some 35,000 to 50,000 soldiers would stay on until the end of 2011 to train and support Iraqi security forces. All troops will be pulled out by 2012.” So now an “immediate withdrawal” means two-to-three years? I’m not complaining by any means because this timetable pretty much ensures mission success. As Pres. George H. W. Bush once said, “Stay the course.”

(more…)

By Andrew L. Jaffee

Iraqis voted on Saturday for local representatives, on an almost violence-free election day aimed at creating provincial councils that more closely represent Iraq’s ethnic, sectarian and tribal balance. By nightfall, there were no confirmed deaths, and children played soccer on closed-off streets in a generally joyous atmosphere. …

So admits the New York Times (NYT) in a story entitled, “Under Tight Security, Iraqis Vote on Almost Violence-Free Election Day,” published on January 31, 2009. In another story, the NYT admitted that the elections occurred in “Iraq’s most peaceful period since the American invasion in 2003.” This is all a far cry from the constant litany of doomsday prognostications we’ve been listening to since the Coalition effort to bring democracy to Iraq began in 2003.

(more…)

by Daniel Pipes*

Why, just two weeks into a 209-week term, assess a new American president’s record on so esoteric a subject as the Middle East and Islam? In Barack Obama’s case, because of:

(1) A contradictory record: His background brims over with wild-eyed anti-Zionist radicals such as Ali Abunimah, Rashid Khalidi, and Edward Said, with Islamists, the Nation of Islam, and the Saddam Hussein regime; but since being elected he has made predominantly center-left appointments and his statements resemble those of his Oval Office predecessors.

(more…)