Today's Article
'The [Iraqi]
government is
unable to govern,'
CIA Director
Michael Hayden
admitted behind
closed doors.
government is
unable to govern,'
CIA Director
Michael Hayden
admitted behind
closed doors.
The American Spark
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Iraq Instability 'Seems Irreversible', Admits CIA
By Cliff Montgomery - July 19th, 2007
In the early hours of Nov. 13th, 2006, members of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group listened as CIA Director
Michael Hayden gave a stark appraisal of that country and its government.
Hayden told them "the inability of the [Iraqi] government to govern seems irreversible," and added that the
Agency could not "point to any milestone or checkpoint where we can turn this thing around," according to
both written records of his presentation and the statements of six participants given to The Washington Post.
"The government is unable to govern," Hayden admitted to group members.
"We have spent a lot of energy and treasure creating a government that is balanced, and it cannot function,"
he emphatically added.
Later in the presentation, he offered a more qualified appraisal: "A government that can govern, sustain and
defend itself is not achievable," he stated, "in the short term."
Hayden's strong words came a mere week after the G.O.P. had lost both houses of Congress and George W.
Bush had sacrificed Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as a concession to the overwhelming mood of the
country.
The bleak statements from the CIA director served to greatly influence the study group's assessment of the
Iraq War. According to the Post, the influence of Hayden's presentation is found in the group's conclusion that
Iraq's political situation is "grave and deteriorating."
As the Post pointed out, no high-ranking Bush Administration official--including Hayden himself--has "publicly
described the Iraqi government in the uniformly negative terms that the CIA director used in his closed-door
briefing."
If some official would do so, perhaps even more Americans would admit that Iraq was never anything more
than the Bush Administration's bout of fruitless nation-building.
Note that one of the 79 recommendations which the Iraq Study Group gave to the American people was that
of ceasing to prop up the Maliki government if it failed to show "substantial progress" on national security and
unity.
And perhaps more tellingly, it further recommended that the principal mission for American troops must
change from that of combat to the training of Iraqi forces. This change, said the group report, should be made
part of a plan to withdrawal combat units by early 2008.
It is interesting to note that the bi-partisan study group--headed by former Bush Sr. Secretary of State James
Baker, a Republican, and former Democratic congressman Lee Hamilton of Indiana--essentially produced the
same analysis of Iraq as almost everyone else who bothers to study that nation.
Other peoples may aid a nation, and may do what they can to curb an obvious humanitarian crisis there; but no
foreign people, no foreign army can save a nation from itself.
The problems of Iraq, regardless of the lies spread by the Bush Administration to invade it, are those of a
social and political breakdown, and hence of a humanitarian crisis. It therefore can only be solved by means
which meet that reality. It cannot be solved by American troops, warfare on an enemy not actually based in
Iraq, and fruitless nation-building.
But leave it to George W. Bush to run from fact and common sense as Superman runs from kryptonite. Bush
declared in January that he was sending even more troops to Iraq to create a troop "surge," which he
breathlessly claimed would lead to certain victory.
Bush's false reasoning is a bit like hearing a quack doctor first declare he must bleed a patient; then after
everyone sees the patient sliding to pale death through loss of blood, insist that if he just bleeds the dying
patient with a bloodletting "surge", the patient will surely have a miraculous healing.
The doctor proves himself a quack because he refuses to admit the obvious fact that his "cure" is only making
matters worse. Only when the doctor admits the truth does he have any hope of curing the patient.
Being the quack politician he is, our liar-in-chief has essentially rejected most of the Iraq Study Group's key
recommendations. Thankfully, bipartisan pairings in both the House and Senate have recently introduced bills
that would make the Iraq Study Group's basic analysis official U.S. policy. We at The American Spark can only
hope they succeed.
Like what you're reading so far? Then why not order a full year (52 issues) of the The American Spark
e-newsletter for only $15? A major article covering an story not being told in the Corporate Press will be
delivered to your email every Monday morning for a full year, for less than 30 cents an issue. Order Now!
By Cliff Montgomery - July 19th, 2007
In the early hours of Nov. 13th, 2006, members of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group listened as CIA Director
Michael Hayden gave a stark appraisal of that country and its government.
Hayden told them "the inability of the [Iraqi] government to govern seems irreversible," and added that the
Agency could not "point to any milestone or checkpoint where we can turn this thing around," according to
both written records of his presentation and the statements of six participants given to The Washington Post.
"The government is unable to govern," Hayden admitted to group members.
"We have spent a lot of energy and treasure creating a government that is balanced, and it cannot function,"
he emphatically added.
Later in the presentation, he offered a more qualified appraisal: "A government that can govern, sustain and
defend itself is not achievable," he stated, "in the short term."
Hayden's strong words came a mere week after the G.O.P. had lost both houses of Congress and George W.
Bush had sacrificed Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as a concession to the overwhelming mood of the
country.
The bleak statements from the CIA director served to greatly influence the study group's assessment of the
Iraq War. According to the Post, the influence of Hayden's presentation is found in the group's conclusion that
Iraq's political situation is "grave and deteriorating."
As the Post pointed out, no high-ranking Bush Administration official--including Hayden himself--has "publicly
described the Iraqi government in the uniformly negative terms that the CIA director used in his closed-door
briefing."
If some official would do so, perhaps even more Americans would admit that Iraq was never anything more
than the Bush Administration's bout of fruitless nation-building.
Note that one of the 79 recommendations which the Iraq Study Group gave to the American people was that
of ceasing to prop up the Maliki government if it failed to show "substantial progress" on national security and
unity.
And perhaps more tellingly, it further recommended that the principal mission for American troops must
change from that of combat to the training of Iraqi forces. This change, said the group report, should be made
part of a plan to withdrawal combat units by early 2008.
It is interesting to note that the bi-partisan study group--headed by former Bush Sr. Secretary of State James
Baker, a Republican, and former Democratic congressman Lee Hamilton of Indiana--essentially produced the
same analysis of Iraq as almost everyone else who bothers to study that nation.
Other peoples may aid a nation, and may do what they can to curb an obvious humanitarian crisis there; but no
foreign people, no foreign army can save a nation from itself.
The problems of Iraq, regardless of the lies spread by the Bush Administration to invade it, are those of a
social and political breakdown, and hence of a humanitarian crisis. It therefore can only be solved by means
which meet that reality. It cannot be solved by American troops, warfare on an enemy not actually based in
Iraq, and fruitless nation-building.
But leave it to George W. Bush to run from fact and common sense as Superman runs from kryptonite. Bush
declared in January that he was sending even more troops to Iraq to create a troop "surge," which he
breathlessly claimed would lead to certain victory.
Bush's false reasoning is a bit like hearing a quack doctor first declare he must bleed a patient; then after
everyone sees the patient sliding to pale death through loss of blood, insist that if he just bleeds the dying
patient with a bloodletting "surge", the patient will surely have a miraculous healing.
The doctor proves himself a quack because he refuses to admit the obvious fact that his "cure" is only making
matters worse. Only when the doctor admits the truth does he have any hope of curing the patient.
Being the quack politician he is, our liar-in-chief has essentially rejected most of the Iraq Study Group's key
recommendations. Thankfully, bipartisan pairings in both the House and Senate have recently introduced bills
that would make the Iraq Study Group's basic analysis official U.S. policy. We at The American Spark can only
hope they succeed.
Like what you're reading so far? Then why not order a full year (52 issues) of the The American Spark
e-newsletter for only $15? A major article covering an story not being told in the Corporate Press will be
delivered to your email every Monday morning for a full year, for less than 30 cents an issue. Order Now!