Whatever's true about "Jimmy Baker," as President Bush calls him, and his Iraq Study Group (ISG), it seems clear that something is afoot. I've been following Baker, Lee Hamilton Inc. for a while now. In the Prospect, I wrote about the options that have dwindled as they've been presented to Baker by the study group's experts, and Eli Lake has more on that in the New York Sun. Lake writes that one of the options ("Stability First") says:
The United States should aim for stability, particularty in Baghdad and political accommodation in Iraq rather than victory. ... Stabilizing Iraq will be impossible without greater cooperation from Iran and Syria.
The other option ("Redeploy and Contain") is basically the option to cut-and-run. (I like that option.) Seems to me, based on my own discussions with people involved in the ISG, that Baker is likely to settle on something in between these two: half-hearted steps to stabilize things, opening talks with Iran and Syria, and phasing out the U.S. military presence.
Laura Rozen, in her blog, is skeptical (cynical?), calling the whole thing a ploy by the White House. Writes Laura:
Seems Baker is a witting campaign prop being coordinated by the White House to communicate the message, the realists will be in charge of foreign policy the next two years. Without the White House having to say it, or it necessarily being true.
I don't see it that way. The realists may not be in charge, yet, but they're getting there. John Warner is the muscle behind Frank Wolf, who created the ISG, and Warner isn't happy. The military, behind Warner, ain't happy, either. Baker is a good lawyer, and when your client (in the case, W.) is guilty, you cut a deal. We might not get W. for murder in Iraq, but he's going down for manslaughter.
Lake quotes a member of the ISG's expert groups thusly: "Baker wants to believe that Sunni dictators in Sunni majority states are representative." Since there only a couple of neocons involved with the ISG, I will leave it to you to guess who threw that particular brickbat at Baker. But I'd guess his initials are RMG.
Comments (1)
Dont you realize that a sea change has been occurring? First James Baker, then a couple of Senators like Warner and Hagel, then the leak that old Father Bush hands are in dismay over the direction of the war in Iraq. Theyre pumping up a campaign to change course and do exactly what Murtha has been calling for, only none of them is being called a traitor or a member of the cut and run group, as Murtha and others were. But thats exactly what theyre proposing.
Just watch as Bush himself starts to back-pedal, saying maybe if something isn't working, we ought to change it. With that, "cut and run" suddenly goes down the drain. No "traitors" here anymore, even Bush when he says he'll consider what Baker and his committee want to propose. I call them all "traitors" because I grieve for the good men and women already killed, and the others who still will be killed, while this sea change occurs.
Posted by OCPatriot | October 16, 2006 5:05 PM
Posted on October 16, 2006 17:05