Will Obama End the Iraq War?

Feb 4, 2009

Will Obama End the Iraq War?

We at FCNL believe that the momentum of grassroots pressure on Congress and the Obama administration will be a critical factor in determining whether the U.S. maintains a large scale military dominance of Iraq or whether it pursues a strategy of inclusive and comprehensive regional diplomatic engagement to stabilize the Middle East.

President Obama campaigned on a platform to end the war, and pledged in his inauguration speech to "responsibly leave Iraq to its people". Obama committed to withdraw all combat troops in 16 months from taking office at a rate of one to two brigades a month--which may only lead to a withdrawal of a third of U.S. troops from Iraq. At the very most Obama's campaign promise would withdraw three quarters of the U.S. military presence by May 2010.

Crucially, Obama has promised to secure a "diplomatic effort to reach a comprehensive compact on the stability of Iraq and the region" and engage in unconditional talks with Iran. More on Obama's stated Iraq plan can be found on the White House website.

Obama's campaign pledge did not explicitly call for complete withdrawal from Iraq--but the Obama administration is legally bound to a complete withdrawal from Iraq that the Bush administration signed. The U.S.-Iraq withdrawal agreement obligates all U.S. soldiers leave Iraq by December 2011.

Whether Obama can end the war will depend on the success of the administration and Congress to:

1) Uphold the U.S. commitment to the U.S.-Iraq withdrawal agreement and withdraw its all of its forces by December 2011. (See some of our concerns that this commitment may be compromised here.)

2) Engage in robust comprehensive diplomacy with all of Iraq's neighbors to reach a regional security agreement. Of utmost importance is U.S. sustained diplomacy with Iran to secure Iran's cooperation in stabilizing Iraq and diffusing U.S.-Iranian tensions that have proved so catastrophic for the region. (See some of our concerns that this commitment may be compromised here.)

3) Substantially reduce the U.S. military presence in Iraq in preparation for a complete withdrawal by December 2011. In accordance with the withdrawal agreement, all combat forces should be withdrawn from Iraqi cities and towns by June 30, 2009. (See some of our concerns that this commitment may be compromised here.)

Press reports and testimony from recent officials indicate that there is intensive disagreement among different segments of the Pentagon, State Department, and the wider foreign policy establishment close to the Obama administration. While some influential figures advocate robust diplomatic engagement in the region, others still advocate U.S. military dominance in the region. The pressure from within and without the Obama administration to breach the 16 month combat withdrawal deadline, violate the U.S.-Iraq withdrawal agreement by maintaining a long term U.S. presence after 2011, and strangle diplomatic efforts with Iran threaten to undermine the potential for this administration to end the war in Iraq.

We at FCNL believe stability in Iraq and the region is in reach through a comprehensive diplomatic approach to the region based on mutual respect and all inclusive engagement. A region far more secure is in reach for the Obama administration and the 111th Congress. Below we outline some concerns we have from recent press statements of pressure for policies that could undermine the potential for regional stability.

1) The danger of continued U.S. military dominance in Iraq after 2011

Secretary Gates has already indicated that the U.S. may violate the U.S.-Iraq withdrawal agreement. On December 19th he said that after 2011 he guessed "several tens of thousands of American troops” would remain in Iraq.

The U.S.-Iraq withdrawal agreement is crystal clear in requiring a complete withdrawal rather than the partial withdrawal to which Secretary Gates alluded. Article 24 of the U.S.-Iraq withdrawal agreement says:

"All the United States Forces shall withdraw from all Iraqi territory no later than December 31, 2011."

The U.S.-Iraq withdrawal agreement caused great political upheaval in the Iraqi government, the Iraqi parliament, and among the Iraqi people. Violating the agreement would not only undermine U.S. credibility, but also the credibility of the Iraqi political process that needs legitimacy to persuade all Iraqi political factions to participate. Pressing the Bush administration to commit to this agreement is a tremendous victory of the Iraqi people in resisting the U.S. military occupation non-violently. The overwhelming majority of Iraqis support a complete withdrawal from Iraq. Breaching that agreement would foment violence and further destabilize Iraq.


2) The danger of failing to reach "a comprehensive compact on the stability of Iraq and the region"

The greatest threat to the Obama administration reaching a regional security arrangement is deterioration of U.S. relations with Iran. There is growing pressure to persuade President Obama to limit diplomacy with Iran to a fixed period of weeks, which would ensure that the U.S. would fail to reach a "grand bargain" with Iran.

Chair of House Foreign Affairs Committee Howard Berman has called on Obama to limit diplomacy with Iran to a maximum of 12 weeks. This idea of limiting diplomacy with Iran to a number of months has also been championed by former U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton. Leading candidate for Prime Minister of Israel Binyamin Netanyahu has expressed support for Obama giving Iran a limited time frame for diplomatic engagement with Iran before taking more hostile actions, including the possibility of a military strike on Iran.


3) The danger of Obama breaching his pledge to substantially reduce the U.S. presence in Iraq leading up to 2011

The first substantial withdrawal that Obama is scheduled to complete is the withdrawal of all U.S. combat troops from Iraqi cities and towns by June 30, 2009. Press reports indicate that top military and Pentagon officials may proceed with re-classifying tens of thousands of "combat troops" as "support troops". If this re-designation is completed, it would undercut the legitimacy of the U.S.-Iraq withdrawal agreement, and cast doubt in Iraq and the U.S. on whether Obama will uphold the U.S. commitment to complete withdrawal by December 2011.

Regarding Obama's plan for withdrawal of all combat forces from Iraq by May 2010, it is generally understood that withdrawing combat troops would reduce the presence the 144,000 troops in Iraq now by more than half. At Obama's promised rate of withdrawing 1-2 combat brigades a month with roughly 3,500-7,000 troops per brigade, between 37,000 and 89,500 U.S. troops would remain in Iraq.

Inter-Press Service reports that Commander of CENTCOM General Petraeus and the top commander in Iraq General Ray Odierno are pressuring Obama to lengthen his 16 month combat troop withdrawal plan.

The New York Times reported on January 29 that Odierno had "developed a plan that would move slower than Mr. Obama's campaign timetable, by pulling out two brigades over the next six months" and had suggested in an interview "it might take the rest of the year to determine exactly when United States forces could be drawn down significantly".

Secretary Gates also noted that a 16 month withdrawal plan for combat troops is only one of the many plans being considered by the Obama administration. On January 22 Gates said, "From really ever since the election, we have been looking at several options, and obviously 16 months is one of them. We are very aware of what the president has said and we have an obligation and a responsibility to provide him with a range of options that include the one that he has spoken about."