By Spencer Case
Friday, June 20, 2014
When President Obama ran for re-election, he bragged
about his decision to leave Iraq as the fulfillment of a campaign promise. Now
he claims that the decision was never really his to begin with.
During his Thursday press conference on the Iraq crisis,
the president was asked whether he regretted his decision not to leave a
residual force there. He replied: “Well, keep in mind that wasn’t a decision
made by me. That was a decision made by the Iraqi government.”
The Iraqi government decision to which Obama refers is
the refusal of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to give U.S. troops
immunity to Iraqi law. The American public would not have tolerated Iraqi
courts trying American military personnel.
Obama negotiated to extend the 2008 Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA),
which would have allowed troops to stay longer with legal immunity, but those
talks broke down. American troops withdrew in December 2011 as the previous
SOFA expired.
Though Obama now argues that the circumstances were
beyond his control, events fortuitously fulfilled a major campaign promise. In
a March 2008 speech in Fayetteville, North Carolina, then-Senator Obama
contrasted himself with Republican hopeful John McCain, who supported the Iraq
war and sought to maintain a significant U.S. military presence there.
“So when I am Commander-in-Chief, I will set a new goal
on Day One: I will end this war,” Obama declared.
Ending the war (not necessarily winning it) seemed to be
equated with reducing the number of U.S. troops there. Obama proposed to remove
one to two combat brigades a month, which would result in complete withdrawal
within 16 months.
On October 21, 2011, it became clear that the Status of
Forces Agreement in Iraq would not be extended. Within hours, the White House
issued a gleeful press release: “So today, I can report that, as promised, the
rest of our troops in Iraq will come home by the end of the year. After nearly nine years, America’s war in
Iraq will be over.”
The statement added that Obama and Prime Minister
al-Maliki “are in full agreement about how to move forward,” suggesting that
the Obama administration had no intention of opposing the decision of the
al-Maliki government. Yet at Thursday’s press conference, Obama claimed his
hand had been forced by an uncooperative negotiating partner.
In the 2008 speech, Obama went on to say that under his
leadership the United States would maintain enough troops to guard the embassy
and man a counter-terrorism force. Just
two weeks before the 2008 presidential election, the Democratic Party platform
similarly proclaimed:
After this redeployment [of U.S. troops], we will keep a residual force in Iraq to perform specific missions: targeting terrorists; protecting our embassy and civil personnel; and advising and supporting Iraq’s Security Forces, provided the Iraqis make political progress.
When Obama voters went to the polls in 2008, they had
every reason to believe that such a force would be maintained. But as the 2012
election neared four years later, Obama made no attempt to install the small
counter-terrorism force in Iraq. He preferred to focus on the fact that he had
withdrawn troops, thus “ending” the war.
Pro-Obama ads asserted that the president had ended the
war in Iraq and criticized Romney for his plan to return troops there. Obama
repeated the assertion that he had ended the Iraq war in each of the three
debates with Romney, including the first one, which was supposed to be about
domestic policy (here, here and here).
Now that the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant is
carving out a swath of terror in northern Iraq, Obama is coming under criticism
and re-posturing. The “fulfilled promise” that helped get Obama re-elected is
now being recast as someone else’s doing.
Given other things Obama has said on the matter, this
comes as a surprise.
No comments:
Post a Comment