Roguely Stated

There’s a time in dead-heat sports matches when a coach has to decide whether to push for the win, focusing all his attention and his players’ energy on the next few minutes, or to run down the clock and start investing in an overtime victory. That decision is hard enough, but perhaps the greatest challenge comes once the run-down-the-clock strategy is in place: letting the players execute while you look past the buzzer to what comes next. We’re getting to that point on Iraq.

Setting the Clock

The question drawing attention right now is about a deadline for withdrawal and, more immediately, a deadline for a progress report from military commanders on the ground.

In a recent National Review Online op-ed, infantry officer and Kennedy School graduate student Alex Gallo makes a compelling case for waiting for General Petraeus’ September report: Duty, Honor… Re-election?.

At the same time, the Army Times is reporting that Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, commander of the 3rd Infantry Division south of Baghdad, is calling for the higher troop levels to be sustained through the summer of 2008: General: Extra troops needed until mid-2008. Staunch war critics, meanwhile, are pressing for a summer update.

Looking past the buzzer

As consensus starts to build around one of these options — hopefully reserving judgment of the surge strategy until at least September — it will be time to shift mental gears and start focusing on other critical questions that demand our attention:

What does withdrawal - or, more accurately, redeployment — look like? How many troops come home? How many stay in Iraq? In the region?

How does redeployment work? How long does it take? A recent Army Times article delves into this question and is worth the read:
Iraq withdrawal would face many uncertainties.

Perhaps most important, what criteria should the U.S. use for a possible return to Iraq? Gallo writes:

If the United States legislates a hasty withdrawal from Iraq, then shortly thereafter the United States will face a critical question: Do we have a national-security interest and moral responsibility to re-intervene in the overwhelming bloodshed that would most certainly occur. We must have that debate now.

Some of these questions are about implementation. Others are about doctrine. All require serious thought, and time. Resolving the “deadlines” issue is important not just for its own sake, but because it creates the opportunity to look past the buzzer. And as every sports fan knows, some of the best, hardest-earned victories happen in overtime.

Tags: alex gallo, army times, bush, iraq, national review online, pentagon, petraeus, war
Related Posts:

None