The Hundred-Years War

Bush's rhetorical "axis of evil" helped mire the United States in an utterly implausible policy, according to the report. (Words do matter, it seems.) "The expression was inappropriate—far from constituting an axis, Iran and Iraq were bitter enemies, and North Korea was not part of the Middle East political scene." The Bush administration replaced Iran's most ruthless enemies, Saddam Hussein and the Taliban, with its own feckless presence next door to the Islamic revolution, then ushered in a Shiite-dominated faith-based government in Baghdad that is closer to Tehran than to Washington. "Today Iran and Iraq are more intricately linked than they were in 2002," says the Carnegie report. "Iraq's problems, and possible solutions, are so closely intertwined with Iran that it is no longer possible to discuss solutions for Iraq without taking into consideration what Iran will do."

"Due in no small part to Bush administration policies," the authors conclude, "Iran is now integral to critical U.S. interests, namely, Iraq, Afghanistan, nuclear nonproliferation, energy security, terrorism, and Arab-Israeli peace. No matter how unpalatable the behavior of the Iranian regime"— and the report makes it clear just how loathsome the mullahs can be—"refusing dialogue with Tehran will not ameliorate any of these issues, and confronting it militarily will exacerbate them all."

This does not mean the Iranians should get a freer ride than they have already. Some sticks have to be waved along with whatever carrots might be offered. Sanctions probably are needed. But the pretenses of threatened war against Iran and calls for regime change have to be put aside. Indeed, they only encourage the Iranians to push ahead with the nuclear program that eventually will give them the power to build atomic weapons. "In a race between the 'regime change clock' and the 'nuclear clock'," says the report, "the latter almost surely will prevail."

If McCain were listening to reason, he'd embrace what the Carnegie Endowment calls "nuanced dialogue" with Iran. Some talks have already been held, but they've been very limited. Washington has to "let it be known that when Tehran is ready to rethink its policies and emerge from isolation, there will be a partner in Washington ready to welcome it," says the Carnegie report.

The military commanders that McCain says he listens to know perfectly well that without diplomatic and political breakthroughs, their soldiers are going to be stuck in Iraq for many more tours, and possibly for generations.

At a press briefing yesterday, Lt. Gen. Carter Ham, the Joint Staff's director for operations, did not sound nearly so confident as McCain about the recent past, the present or the future. Even if Al Qaeda in Iraq is on the run for the moment, "it is premature," said Ham, "to declare victory or anything." (Al Qaeda in Iraq is only one small part of the picture. Keep in mind that in the collective judgment of American intelligence agencies, "the term 'civil war' does not adequately capture the complexity of the conflict in Iraq.")

Some U.S. combat brigades are being withdrawn, slowly, but this summer the total number of American troops in Iraq—about 140,000—will be about 8,000 higher than it was before "the surge" began a year ago. And the military just isn't sure when or whether more can come out. Even as Iraqi security forces take over some of the combat, more Americans are required for air support, logistics and, not least, to run the prison system. And then, as Ham put it, "the enemy always has a vote." The biggest enemy, Iran, has a great many of them, in fact.

So, no, Mr. Republican, the Iraq thing is not over, and the Iran thing is just beginning. And if the occupation launched by Bush is indeed embraced by a President McCain, then there's no end in sight. Now enjoy your oysters.

© 2008