Last week I posted that Iraw had passed a major reconciliation law. The media mostly ignored this.
The first one, from Strategy Page, Reinforcing Failure points to the role of the Iraqis themselves in defeating al-Qaeda, and on the role of the media:
Apparently the Taliban missed the part where al Qaeda got run out of Iraq, by Iraqis, because of the large number of civilians killed by terrorist bombs.
This years “Spring Offensive” will apparently feature more suicide bombs, and attempts to manipulate the Western media (to pressure Western governments to withdraw troops from Afghanistan).
The second one, from Commentary, Big News from Baghdad, explains why the reconciliation law is important:
We are now seeing extraordinary security gains from the last year translate into both political reconciliation and legislative progress. Within the last week the Iraqi parliament passed key laws having to do with provincial elections (the law devolves power to the local level in a decentralization system that is groundbreaking for the region), the distribution of resources, and amnesty. And those laws follow ones passed in recent months having to do with pensions, investment, and de-Ba’athification.
American Ambassador Ryan Crocker told Fred Barnes of The Weekly Standard that “the whole motivating factor” beyond the legislation was “reconciliation, not retribution.” This is “remarkably different” from six months ago, according to the widely respected, straight-talking Crocker.
What does it mean in regards to the 2008 US Presidential elections, then?
Progress in Iraq means life is getting progressively more difficult for Democrats and their two presidential front-runners, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Having strongly opposed the surge, Obama and Clinton have been forced by events to concede that security progress has been made. But until now they have insisted that the surge is a failure because we’re not seeing political progress. That claim is now being shattered.
Soon Obama and Clinton will have no argument left to justify their position on Iraq. It will become increasingly clear that they are committed to leaving Iraq simply because they are committed to leaving Iraq, regardless of the awful consequences that would follow. It is an amazing thing to witness: two leading presidential candidates who are committed to engineering an American retreat, which would lead to an American defeat, despite the progress we are making on every conceivable front.
At the end of the day, this position will hurt Democrats badly, because their position will hurt America badly.