I have argued, to the contrary, that newly “democratic” Iraq is becoming an Islamist satellite of Iran, hostile to the U.S., hostile to Israel, and hostile to non-Muslims, homosexuals, and other minorities. I won’t rehearse the back-up for those claims. I simply point to this report from last Friday’s New York Times, detailing that under Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki (the Islamist prime minister the U.S. has backed in the interest of promoting democracy), Iraq — nudged by Iran — is supporting the Assad regime in its brutal crackdown in Syria[.]
Yes, I'm upset that the Iraqi government essentially sided with Assad publicly, but I think it is fear that led to this and not admiration.
After 8 years of having sizable American ground forces to protect them, the Iraqis are worried about what happens next. Iraq lacks the military to protect themselves from Iran and won't for a decade or so. Even Iran's sanctions-crippled military could take some key real estate along the border and Iraq would be helpless to stop them.
I suspect (or perhaps, I "hope" is a better word) that for the Iraqis, this was a cheap way to balance their fears. They publicly say the words that Iran wants to hear while knowing that Iraqis in western Iraq are probably aiding the Syrians across the border. The Iraqis also probably figure that the Assad regime will go down anyway and that we'll forgive Iraq for those words--or will at least be too busy coping with a post-Assad Syria to worry much about them. Iran would not be so forgiving.
If we stay in Iraq (and 10,000 American troops is about 15,000 shy of what I'd want, but it seems like the best we'll get) and demonstrate that we won't let domestic considerations lead us to abandon Iraq after battlefield victory, Iraq will come around. Fear of being abandoned to the neighbor who can't get tired and go home across the seas will fade. Natural factors that have divided Iraq from Iran will rebound, and Iran's efforts to gain influence will fail to achieve controlling interest and then ebb.
And at a more basic level, it is silly to argue that success must be defined by the degree to which Iraq is openly hostile to Iran. By that measure, Iraq under Saddam Hussein was the peak of our successful Iraq policy.
Iraq is a real if struggling democracy weak in both governing institutions and in capacity for external defense. We need patience and a long view to build on what we've already achieved. We need to stay and the Iraqis need to have confidence that we'll stay.
UPDATE: Given the news as of Thursday morning that President Obama will call for Assad to step down, truly smart diplomacy would have given Iraq a pass on this issue and let Iraq side with Assad in the knowledge that we'd be working to get rid of Assad.
It's like giving a legislator in a split district a pass on a tough issue because you know you have the votes without that legislator. I will say that as much as I belittle the State Department, I admit that truly smart things are kept quiet. This might be one of them.
