President Obama announced today that the USA would not be sending troops to Iraq. Once again, American politics triumphed over the national interest. Don't get me wrong. I am not advocating sending major ground forces to Iraq. There is just no reason why Obama had to rule it out completely and let the Sunni terrorist forces know that they need no fear the American reaction. Nor does it make sense to rule out using special forces to provide assistance to the Iraqis as well as to give intelligence to our air power. Remember, in 2001, America used less than 1000 special forces in Afghanistan and it allowed the Northern Alliance to oust the Taliban from power. Nevertheless, Obama has now ruled out "boots on the ground" in Iraq.
Now let's translate into the future the full effect of what Obama decided this morning. Prime Minister Maliki of Iraq has been watching his army disintegrate in the face of some rather puny attacks by the terrorists. Remember, the Iraqi army outnumbers the terrorist forces by roughly 25 to 1, but the terrorists are winning easily. The army troops are just deserting when the attack is imminent. Maliki has only one ready source of military force to use to fight the terrorists. Sadly, that is the army of Iran. The head of the Iranian Quds force was in Baghdad yesterday to offer Iranian assistance. After Obama's refusal today to help in a meaningful way, it is likely that Maliki will invite the Iranians into Iraq in the next few days. That will put Iranian troops all across the southern half of Iraq and it will give Iran effective control of that area. After all, there will be no force capable of stopping the Iranians.
Now let's consider the effect of having half or more of Iraq under Iranian control. First of all, it will mean that Iran will get effective control of the world oil markets. Iran itself is a substantial oil producer, but when one adds to the Iranian production all of the oil pumped out of sourthern Iraq, the joint production constitutes a big chunk of the world oil trade. Second, having Iran controlling such an important world resource will make it impossible for the Europeans to join America in any further action against Iran having nuclear weapons. Europe will not impose sanctions on Iran that will result in oil prices rising dramatically while supplies of oil to Europe get cut off. Third, the end of meaningful efforts to stop Iranian nukes will mean that Israel will be much more likely to attack Iran to destroy its nuclear facilities. Israel has a choice between destruction at the hands of the Iranians with nuclear weapons or such an attack. Launching such an attack, however, will most likely lead to a major confrontation between Israel on the one hand and Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas on the other hand. All of the Middle East from Egypt to Pakistan could end up at war.
It would be nice if president Obama considered the long term implications of his moves rather than just sticking to his ideology that all US military moves are "bad". Sadly, that never seems to happen.
Now let's translate into the future the full effect of what Obama decided this morning. Prime Minister Maliki of Iraq has been watching his army disintegrate in the face of some rather puny attacks by the terrorists. Remember, the Iraqi army outnumbers the terrorist forces by roughly 25 to 1, but the terrorists are winning easily. The army troops are just deserting when the attack is imminent. Maliki has only one ready source of military force to use to fight the terrorists. Sadly, that is the army of Iran. The head of the Iranian Quds force was in Baghdad yesterday to offer Iranian assistance. After Obama's refusal today to help in a meaningful way, it is likely that Maliki will invite the Iranians into Iraq in the next few days. That will put Iranian troops all across the southern half of Iraq and it will give Iran effective control of that area. After all, there will be no force capable of stopping the Iranians.
Now let's consider the effect of having half or more of Iraq under Iranian control. First of all, it will mean that Iran will get effective control of the world oil markets. Iran itself is a substantial oil producer, but when one adds to the Iranian production all of the oil pumped out of sourthern Iraq, the joint production constitutes a big chunk of the world oil trade. Second, having Iran controlling such an important world resource will make it impossible for the Europeans to join America in any further action against Iran having nuclear weapons. Europe will not impose sanctions on Iran that will result in oil prices rising dramatically while supplies of oil to Europe get cut off. Third, the end of meaningful efforts to stop Iranian nukes will mean that Israel will be much more likely to attack Iran to destroy its nuclear facilities. Israel has a choice between destruction at the hands of the Iranians with nuclear weapons or such an attack. Launching such an attack, however, will most likely lead to a major confrontation between Israel on the one hand and Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas on the other hand. All of the Middle East from Egypt to Pakistan could end up at war.
It would be nice if president Obama considered the long term implications of his moves rather than just sticking to his ideology that all US military moves are "bad". Sadly, that never seems to happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment