Good news -- the insurgency is over! Now we need a new strategy for the Iraq War.

[Culpeper]

Bill, I agree with your post. I'm beginning to wonder if Donald Rumsfeld had a copy of the USMC Small Wars Manual sitting on his desk for nothing other than decoration. I believe that the term, "insurgency" is obsolete at this point. Religious, tribal, and civil rights warfare is more like it. Along with terrorist groups just to add a little Jihad to the mix. Let it be known to all awful regimes that the United States can and will topple your power and turn your entire country into utter chaos. No organization has ever won a war by solely concentrating on killing innocent civilians and the so-called insurgency started dying when Iraq established a government and started controlling propaganda.

[Fabius Maximus]

As Jonslack and Bill note, insurgency is not an all or nothing thing. Rather, the "no insurgency" analysis suggests that the balance has changes such that we should adopt a new strategic direction.

The alterative to COIN -- perhaps the only alt other than load and leave -- is to attempt putting Iraq on the path that Jonslack describes in our history. America was not built as a top-down project, but from the bottom up. That is, it was built on a foundation of legitimate States and their governing elites. Only after the Civil War (aka the War between the States) was the national structure clearly stronger than the States.

That suggests, as Bill said, attempting to retain order. Except that in the “Federal” solution we would stop fighting the local militias. Instead work to cut deals with as many as possible. The political and security rails would run in parallel, not in series.

As usual, RTK asks some pointed but pertinent questions. Answers:

1. Do as described briefly above, and in more detail in my op-ed.

2. I do not comment on current ops. All that I’ll say is in the article, the Mao quote.

3. From the start I shared the opinion of the real experts, the A-team, in the 4GW community. Most were of this opinion before the war started that we can destroy a state but not build one. We’re in the era of “the decline of the state” as described by Martin van Creveld. Failed or wrecked states easily fragment into situations like the 30 years war, where many factions – divided among varying lines – fight one another.

This suggests another reason to stop fighting the local elites. If we do break them, that might not build the center. Rather it might initiate another round of disintegration. This is Lind’s worst case, where we have nobody to negotiate with.

[RTK]

1. Don't buy, as you've gone into no detail, nor do you offer solutions.
2. Don't buy, it's as you have before. No substance to a real issue. You seemto shy away from these.
3. I don't believe you know what you're talking about. Perhaps after speaking firsthand to those who are power brokers you'd understand. You clearly don't.

[jcustis]

3. From the start I shared the opinion of the real experts, the A-team, in the 4GW community.

Who are these folks?

I've weighed a federal Iraq pretty heavily in my mind for quite a while, but I still do not pretend to know what that actually gets us. What are the benefits to that versus an Iraq structured on a central government?

[Ironhorse]

Seems like a magic pill solution to me. And too big a pill to swallow at this point.

JonSlack provides a nice summary of our own growing pains.

Iraq cultural experiences include the extremes of excessively concentrated central government power, and tribalism/localism with only loose and fleeting alliances based on specific issues or relationships. Compromise, a key to a federal system, is not in the vernacular.

For the metaphor crowd, I would say that this is NOT a case of just teaching an old dog a new trick, but one of not being able to make a horse drink.

The net of this cultural impasse, as I see it from my comfortable suburban living room at the moment, is that there is no feasible third way -- make Plan A work, or let there be civil war, but we can not realistically try to apply the political equivalent of the Triple Lindy just because we gooned up the early attempts at a strong central democracy.

Has anyone seen an outline for a federal solution, and path to get there, that they feel is workable? I.e. anything more than escapism and inventing a COA C, just becasue COAs A and B don't seem pat?

[Fabius Maximus]

I agree with Ironhorse that the best metaphor might be “but one of not being able to make a horse drink.”

As Ironhorse and Jcustis have noted, re-building an Iraq state along Federal lines might not work. It's not clear that we know how to build a state, or even understand the dynamics involved. Again borrowing from Ironhorse (who used this in a different context), state formation is “a magic pill solution.” We try it over and over because all we have are these pills, and we hope they’re magic.

Look at what follows the collapse of empires in Europe (Russian, ottoman, QAustro-hungrey, German). Equally bad or worse was the process of state formation following de-colonization of colonies in SE Asia, India/Pak, Central and South America, and (horrific) Africa. Lots of wars until things sort themselves out. Some just never seem to sort out.

As Ironhorse says, many have not given up on the top-down approach in Iraq. Question: at what point would you say this approach has failed?

What does a federal Iraq get us? It's a bottom-up path to building a central gov't. It’s a plan “B.”

The only other solution is creating 3 smaller states. Kurdistan and Shia-land might work, although our allies the Turks might not like it. Also, as small, oil-rich states they might be too vulnerable to survive.

Unfortunately the third piece, central Iraq, looks to be a poor, multi-ethnic, war zone if left to its own resources.

RTK, this was an op-ed, advocating a change of direction. A turn signal, not an operational plan. This scenario calls for a “stand down the forces” and “get everyone around the table” process. The best that can be said for it is that sometimes it works. If it doesn’t? We give up and leave, or try something else.

This is of course just a guess, but I think domestic political considerations favor this course. It might be given more time to work than continued COIN.

Off-topic: Professor Colin Kahl of the Political Science Dept at the U of Minnesota wrote a brief on the evolution of our COIN ops in Iraq.
Posted on "Informed Consent"
Blog of Juan Cole, Prof History, U Michigan
http://www.juancole.com/

[SWJED]

... Off-topic: Professor Colin Kahl of the Political Science Dept at the U of Minnesota wrote a brief on the evolution of our COIN ops in Iraq.
Posted on "Informed Consent"
Blog of Juan Cole, Prof History, U Michigan
http://www.juancole.com/

Professor Kahl has been kind enough to grant the SWJ permission to post his e-mail, the following link also contains a link to the Andrew Krepinevich briefing that generated his e-mail - The Four Phases of the U.S. COIN Effort in Iraq.

[Fabius Maximus]

The following was a reply to a question by RTK:

3. From the start I shared the opinion of the real experts, the A-team, in the 4GW community. Most were of this opinion before the war started that we can destroy a state but not build one. We’re in the era of “the decline of the state” as described by Martin van Creveld. Failed or wrecked states easily fragment into situations like the 30 years war, where many factions – divided among varying lines – fight one another.

This suggests another reason to stop fighting the local elites. If we do break them, that might not build the center. Rather it might initiate another round of disintegration. This is Lind’s worst case, where we have nobody to negotiate with.

No longer theory or forecast, that is moving into the realm of fact. Probably a bad thing for us. For Iraq. For everyone in the ME region.

Shiite militia may be disintegrating
AP
March 21, 2007
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070321/...sadr_defectors

[RTK]

The following was a reply to a question by RTK:


No longer theory or forecast, that is moving into the realm of fact. Probably a bad thing for us. For Iraq. For everyone in the ME region.

Shiite militia may be disintegrating
AP
March 21, 2007
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070321/...sadr_defectors

Which question was that? I've somehow lost track.

[Stan]

Wasn't he suppose to go on vacation....like last week ?

[Fabius Maximus]

The internet is everywhere, and I have a bit more time than I anticipated.