US can no longer stay the course

Three years into the war billed as the "liberation" of Iraq, the country teeters on the verge of Lebanonisation. Meanwhile, the six-syllable word the invasion was supposed to deliver, "democratisation" has offered glimmers of hope but, in its infancy, cannot overcome long-festering sectarian tensions.

It turns out that Washington's neoconservatives were wrong about the dominoes. They expected regional despots to meet the same fate as Saddam. Instead, inadequate post-war planning and a bungled occupation resulted in ordinary Iraqis losing their lives. An entirely different and devastatingly tragic game of dominoes.

The rationale for the war was to counter a "grave and imminent threat". Of course, that threat never existed. Now, there is no doubt Iraq is a cauldron of instability that threatens to consume itself, endangers its neighbours, and has become a proven training ground for

Al Qaida. Last year, shortly before the war's second anniversary, CIA Director Porter Goss told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, "Islamic extremists are exploiting the Iraqi conflict to recruit new anti-US jihadists."

Nothing has changed. In fact, last month's attack on the Shiite Golden Mosque in Samarra has propelled the nation towards all-out civil chaos, if not war. The US responded on Thursday with "Operation Swarmer", an air assault outside Samarra targeting insurgent cells and weapons caches. But the actual "swarm" of military forces is only 1,500 men; 3,500 troops took part in last year's Anbar Province campaign.

Like Anbar, "Operation Swarmer" is a joint American-Iraqi exercise; unlike Anbar, now the Bush Administration has every reason to showcase Iraqi forces in action, no matter how few or how inexperienced. Why? US forces are preparing to come home.

The White House avoids any mention of a specific end date or timetable, but the head of US Central Command General John Abizaid has "discussed the potential for a withdrawal of some US troops this summer".

In plain English: US forces are coming home. While the Pentagon plans drawdowns, the White House maintains rhetorical support for the objectives of the war. On Thursday, in a speech at the National Endowment for Democracy, President George W. Bush said, "Iraqi democracy will succeed that freedom can be the future of every nation." But it will be Iraqi, not American, blood that secures that future.

Increasing disillusionment

Bush is not concerned about the defection of neoconservatives who once backed the war, like William Buckley and Francis Fukuyama. His problem is with millions of Americans who are increasingly disillusioned with his leadership. A recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll indicates his approval rating is hovering near 37 per cent. In 2005 his sagging numbers were troubling but not urgent; this year, with the November Congressional mid-term elections hanging in the balance, Bush has no margin for error.

The Dubai Ports World debacle spurred by the Republican revolt in the House of Representatives was a clear indication that Bush's leadership was in jeopardy. In an effort to reassert his authority, the White House issued the National Security Strategy, a rehash of the 2002 document with an added emphasis on Iran. Then Bush went on tour again, promoting the war to shore up flagging American support.

In the end, Bush knows what we all know: the only consolation for voters will be the sight of US troops on US shores. To secure such a drawdown absent the haunting images of US withdrawal from Vietnam, Washington is confronted with some very difficult choices.

Of principal concern is how to engage Iran on Iraq without engaging Iran on its nuclear programme. Though Steven Hadley, Bush's National Security Advisor, may downplay the US-Iran dialogue, war fatigue elevates diplomacy's clout in accomplishing the president's objectives in his second term. It is no accident that one of Bush's most trusted confidantes Condeleeza Rice is Secretary of State.

The National Security Strategy, maintains the pre-emptive posture that was used to justify the Iraq war, yet also highlights diplomacy as an asset in the ongoing confrontation over Tehran's nuclear ambitions.

Bush beating his chest about Iran is unlikely to stir many American voters who are already wary of his penchant for military adventures and are concerned about issues closer to home: health care coverage, education and employment. That leaves Bush with one critical task between now and November: to "win" the war in Iraq.

Laughable, yes. But a savvy public relations team can devise a figleaf broad enough to cover him until December. Undoubtedly, a team is tucked away in some office on Pennsylvania Avenue dreaming up the strategy now. "Mission Accomplished: Again."

- Maggie Mitchell Salem is a political and communications consultant based in Washington, DC. Previously, she was director of communications at the Middle East Institute and a special assistant to former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.