Subscribe to our free daily newsletters
. Military Space News .




Subscribe to our free daily newsletters



US Adversaries And Iraq

Enemies on every corner - AFP file image.
By Mark N. Katz
Washington (UPI) Dec 22, 2006
A great debate is now taking place in the United States over whether to withdraw American forces from Iraq. Ironically, many of America's actual or potential adversaries, which opposed the U.S.-led intervention there in the first place, would now prefer American forces to remain in Iraq. This is not, however, because they suddenly wish America well. Far from it.

Many of those governments which opposed the U.S.-led intervention in Iraq back in 2002-03 did so because they feared it would succeed. Some -- most notably Iran and Syria, but dictatorships generally -- feared that if the U.S. intervention in Iraq went well, they would be next.

Others such as Russia and China did not fear American intervention against them, but were genuinely worried that an America that prevailed in Iraq would then oust other dictatorial regimes allied to them and set up democracies allied to Washington. They feared that the U.S. would come to further dominate the international relations system that had emerged after the end of the Cold War. Even some democratic governments -- France and Germany in particular -- shared this concern.

None of these governments, however, now fears that America will prevail in Iraq. They see America as being bogged down there instead. And many of them like that. For an America indefinitely expending its resources in a fruitless effort in Iraq is less likely to bother them. Indeed, an America bogged down in Iraq gives them some room to maneuver that they would not have otherwise.

The anti-American regimes in Syria and Iran, for instance, no longer fear an American intervention that would overthrow them. Indeed, this is now so unlikely that Syria has felt free to resume its meddling in Lebanon while Iran has continued work on the nuclear program that Washington so strongly objects to.

The Kremlin and Russian public opinion seems to take great satisfaction from the U.S. being bogged down in Iraq, like the former Soviet Union was in Afghanistan. More practically, Washington's preoccupation with Iraq means that America has less time and attention to devote to countering Moscow's efforts to reassert its dominance over former Soviet states.

A smug "I-told-you-so" attitude has also developed in France and Germany over America's Iraqi predicament. For China, the American preoccupation with Iraq is highly convenient as Beijing expands its political-economic influence in many parts of the developing world.

For the Taliban, America being stuck in an Iraqi quagmire is a godsend. Otherwise, the U.S. would have far more resources available to combat it.

Similarly, North Korea's "Dear Leader" has undoubtedly calculated that America's preoccupation with Iraq allows him to get away with behaving more provocatively since the U.S. does not want to fight him as well as in Iraq and Afghanistan all at the same time.

The Bush administration and many American conservatives worry that a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq would benefit America's adversaries. While many of them will indeed crow about America's "defeat," a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq could actually give these adversaries something to worry about. With America gone, there would be nothing to prevent Iraqi instability from spilling over into Syria and Iran. While America would act to protect its allies (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan and Turkey) from this, neither it nor anyone else may be willing to do anything to help Syria and Iran.

A careful reading of the Iraq Study Group report reveals an understanding of this point. Their recommendation that Washington talk with Damascus and Tehran about Iraq was not based on any idealistic expectation about their willingness to help the United States, but out of the hard-headed appraisal that these two have a strong incentive to work with the U.S. in order to prevent the damage they would surely suffer if America simply withdrew.

Similarly, after withdrawing from Iraq, America would have far more resources available to deal with the Taliban and North Korea. Washington would also be able to devote more attention, as it should have been doing all along, to what the Russians and the Chinese are up to in other countries. There are many other problems in other areas, such as Darfur and Somalia, needing American attention that its preoccupation with Iraq has prevented.

It is not yet clear whether the American debate over Iraq will result in the withdrawal of U.S. forces from that country. What is clear, though, is that many of America's adversaries hope that the U.S. will remain bogged down in Iraq indefinitely.

(Mark N. Katz is a professor of government and politics at George Mason University.)

Related Links
Iraq: The first techonology war of the 21st century

Russia Against US Missile Defense Plans For Europe
Lekhtusi, Russia (RIA Novosti) Dec 27, 2006
Russia is opposed to the United States' plans to deploy an anti-missile shield in Central Europe, the defense minister said Friday. Sergei Ivanov, who is also a deputy prime minister, said these plans do not even make "political sense, to say nothing of military sense". He said deployment of a missile defense system will not affect Russia's security in any way.







  • Russia Against US Missile Defense Plans For Europe
  • Analysis: Three crises pileup?
  • Policy Watch: U.S.' adversaries and Iraq
  • Isolation Of Russian Far East Threat To National Security

  • Russia Seeking To Extend Use Of Cold War Missile Stocks
  • US Naval Buildup In Gulf Shows Enduring Presence
  • France Orders Six Barracuda Class Nuclear-Driven Submarines
  • LockMart Delivers Hardware For 3rd Advanced EHF Military CommSat

  • LockMart-Built Trident II D5 Launched In Two-Missile US Navy Test
  • LockMart Announces Firing Of Hellfire II Missile During French Evaluation
  • Raytheon Awarded Contract For Missile Launcher Production
  • Pakistan Test Fires Nuclear-Capable Missile

  • New Radar At Lekhtusi: A Shield Against Missile Attacks
  • South Korea Eyes Independent Missile Defense System
  • BMD Watch: Bob Gates backs BMD
  • BMD Focus: Collision course with Russia

  • IATA Gives Cautious Welcome To EU Emissions Trading Plan
  • EU Proposes CO2 Emission Quotas For Airlines
  • Shoulder Ligament A Linchpin In The Evolution Of Flight
  • EU Compromises On Airlines In Carbon-Trading Scheme

  • Warfare Center To Host Autonomous Unmanned Vehicle Fest 2007
  • Northrop Grumman Lifts US Navy To New Era For Unmanned Flight
  • Boeing Australia To Provide Australia Its First Tactical UAV
  • Boeing, U.S. Air Force Demonstrate UAV Automated Aerial Refueling Capability

  • Outside View: Short-changing Iraq
  • Outside View: Syria must be involved
  • Analysis: Bush's last attempt in Iraq
  • Analysis: Iraq militias run police chiefs

  • New Antenna Begins Testing
  • Crews Test Latest Stryker Vehicle
  • ATK Pioneering Air Bursting Ammunition Technology Selected by US Navy
  • Star-P Uses Supercomputers In Support Of Futuristic Military Vehicles

  • The content herein, unless otherwise known to be public domain, are Copyright 1995-2006 - SpaceDaily.AFP and UPI Wire Stories are copyright Agence France-Presse and United Press International. ESA PortalReports are copyright European Space Agency. All NASA sourced material is public domain. Additionalcopyrights may apply in whole or part to other bona fide parties. Advertising does not imply endorsement,agreement or approval of any opinions, statements or information provided by SpaceDaily on any Web page published or hosted by SpaceDaily. Privacy Statement