The supposedly bipartisan Iraq Study Group, led by that redoubtable political fixer James Baker, has been hit by partisanship, according to an intriguing report in Newsday. The article says:
"A source who spoke recently to a leader of the Iraq Study Group said he complained bitterly about internal dissension and partisanship among members of the supposedly bipartisan group, and was worried about reaching consensus on the key issues."
According to Newsday, one of the Iraq experts who advised the Baker group said his colleagues were split between neoconservatives and more conventional "cold warriors", such as Mr Baker himself, who want a more pragmatic approach to the Middle East.
At Slate, Christopher Hitchens, a strong supporter of the war because it toppled a dictator, makes clear his dislike of Mr Baker's realpolitik approach to international affairs. Mr Hitchens argues that the Baker group's job is to provide political cover for a retreat.
"Taken together with the dismissal of Donald Rumsfeld, the nomination of Robert Gates, and the holy awe with which the findings of the Iraq Study Group are now expected, this means that the Bush administration, or large parts of it, is now cutting if not actually running, and it is looking for partners in the process."
Mr Hitchens' worst fears may be proved right. But the signs are that the debate in Washington is fierce and that the die is far from cast. The Pentagon is conducting its own review, with an option of a temporary increase of between 20,000 and 30,000 troops amid speculation that it is doing so in case it does not like the recommendations of the Baker group.
No comments:
Post a Comment