This morning Iraq’s presidency council voted to delay parliamentary elections until March 7th of 2010.  The decision came after a meeting at President Jalal Talabani’s residency late Tuesday which included Talabani and two vice presidents, Adel Abdul Mahdi and Tariq al-Hashimi, along with Faraj al-Haidari, head of the IHEC.  Although the elections were previously slated to take place on March 6th, Chief of Staff Naseer al-Ani stated that the one day delay was not politically motivated.  The announcement comes after 5 near simultaneous bomb blasts killed 110 people and injured hundreds more yesterday in Baghdad.  

As the election is almost upon us, this is the best time to become more informed about the issues.  My goal with this post is to display the facts, and let you judge for yourself.  The only thing that I will tell you to do is register and VOTE (if you didn't know, many states are allowing you to vote early this year, so scheduling conflicts should not be an issue!).  The right to vote is a rarity in some places in the world, and we should consider it a privilege, not an obligation.  (Additionally, I encourage you to participate in the Foreign Policy Association's Election Guide, which takes a poll on a variety of issues.  It's a wonderful project to be a part of, as the results will be sent to the new administration, Congress and other elected officials.)  So without further preaching, here are your candidates. 

Senator John McCain (and Governor Sarah Palin):
Senator McCain believes that we should not leave Iraq before it becomes a stable, democratic state and is capable of sovereignty.  We also should not leave until al-Qaeda in Iraq is defeated, and we should not allow Iraq to become a failed state, a breading ground for terrorism, or allow Iraq to be overcome by Iran's influence.  Most importantly, Iraqi security forces should be completely capable of defending their country without US help. 

McCain advocated for the Surge from the beginning, after four years of troop mismanagement, and it paid off; it decreased sectarian violence and increased economic and political development.  If Obama is elected, he will extract most of the troops, leaving behind only a small “strike force” which will not work in quelling terrorism.  McCain proposes continuing with this counterinsurgency strategy that began with the surge in 2007. 

With political development on the rise in Iraq, John McCain believes that this growth should continue.  He advocates for giving the UN a larger role in the upcoming provincial and national elections in late 2008 and 2009, respectfully.  He would like the US military to stay through these elections, ensuring safety and security for every Iraqi citizen who votes.  He does not want Iraq to think that we have abandoned them. 

Iraqi economic growth needs to continue.  In order for this to happen, Iraq should use a portion of its income to provide employment for all citizens.  However, the international community has an obligation to provide continuing financial support in order to get the private sector up and running, which will allow for the majority of Iraq's economic growth in the future.  Iraq's neighbors should also be investing in its economy with their large oil profits. 

Senator McCain believes that the international community should pressure Syria and Iran to stop supporting terrorism.  He believes that for this to happen, the US must also increase its military power and positioning in the Middle East region. 

He believes that it is necessary to be honest with the American people about the progress made in Iraq, as well as the difficulties still to come. 

Finally, John McCain is quoted stating, “I do not want to keep our troops in Iraq a minute longer than necessary to secure our interests there.  Our goal is an Iraq that can stand on its own as a democratic ally and a responsible force for peace in its neighborhood.  Our goal is an Iraq that no longer needs American troops… To promise a withdrawal of our forces from Iraq, regardless of the calamitous consequences to the Iraqi people, our most vital interests, and the future of the Middle East, is the height of irresponsibility.”
-”Strategy for Victory in Iraq“

Senator Barack Obama (and Senator Joe Biden):
Senator Obama first outlines the problems facing us in this war. 
Inadequate Security and Political Process: The Iraqi government is not taking the responsibility that it should in controlling its security and politics.  Although the counterinsurgency methods were successful, the sacrifices made by American troops since the surge began (over 1,000 casualties since 2007) display the fact that we cannot afford to continue on this path without full accommodation by the Iraqi government. 
Strains on the Military: These strains are too great; on both our troops and our equipment.  Troops have been sent for multiple tours, physically and psychologically stressing them and their families.  Equipment is wearing out 9 times faster than normal because of constant use in a harsh environment. 
Resurgent Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan: 2007 was the most violent year in Afghanistan since 2001 and our invasion.  The Taliban and al-Qaeda have regrouped while military and financial resources remain stuck in Iraq.  We should be attending to the threat of another attack on the US. 
A New Strategy Needed: Over 4,000 Americans have died in this war.  Over 60,000 have been injured.  It has lasted longer than WWI, WWII and the Civil War, and our government may spend up to $2.7 trillion on the war and its aftermath.  While US troops have found the right tactics for decreasing the violence in Iraq, it is still the wrong strategy for pressing the Iraqi government into taking responsibility for its country. 

Senator Obama's plan:
Primarily, while President Bush pushed for this war in 2002, Senator Obama spoke out against the war, warning against the consequences.  ’We must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in.’  Obama will give the Secretary of Defense and the military commanders the mission to end the war.  However, this means a responsible, phased withdrawal, done with the advice of commanders on the ground and in consultation with the Iraqi government.  Military experts have agreed with withdrawing 1-2 brigades per month, which will remove them by the summer of 2010.  A small force will remain in the country and the region for the purpose of counter-terrorism missions.  He does not advocate for permanent bases in Iraq, but continuing to train and support Iraqi security forces. 

Senator Obama states that the US must apply pressure on the Iraqi government.  A blank check has not and will not force Iraq's leaders to take responsibility for their political progress or their finances.  This is not a problem that can be fixed by the US military.  The phased withdrawal will encourage leadership in Iraqi politics and security, and the pace of the withdrawal will leave plenty of time for Iraq to get its affairs in order.  All levels of Iraqi government should be engaged in negotiating oil revenue sharing, disputed territories, elections, the equitable provision of services, federalism, displaced Iraqis and reforming security forces. 

Obama will begin a diplomatic surge in order to agree on a process of stability in Iraq, as well as in the region.  This will include Iraq's neighbors, especially Syria and Iran, in order to secure Iraq's borders, keep neighboring countries in a neutral position, isolating al-Qaeda, supporting reconciliation among Iraq's sectarian groups and providing financial support for reconstruction and development. 

The US has an obligation to Iraqi refugees and displaced persons.  Senator Obama will provide at least $2 billion to expand services provided to Iraqi refugees, inside and outside their country.  He also believes that working with Iraqi authorities and the international community to prevent humanitarian crimes and crises is very important.  The US should reserve the right to intervene militarily to prevent such crimes, such as genocidal violence or war crimes. 

Finally, Barack Obama believes that any strategic framework must be approved by Congress and have bipartisan support at home.  This includes the commitment to withdraw troops and not maintaining permanent bases in Iraq. 

Senator Obama is quoted stating, “Here is the truth: fighting a war without end will not force the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future… I will end this war.  Not because politics compels it.  Not because our troops cannot bear the burden- as heavy as it is.  But because it is the right thing to do for our national security, and it will ultimately make us safer.”
-”War in Iraq“

This election should be about making decisions through knowledge, not assumptions.  Don't be afraid to do some research– if you know the facts, you should be proud of your decision, no matter who your choice is. 

Good news!  Iraq will be going to China next month, and sending four athletes: a men's rowing double, a discus thrower and their sprinter, Dana Hussain (their archer may also have the chance to compete, as long as his spot is still available after entries are completed by other countries.)  USA Today reports that the IOC cleared the Iraqi athletes late Tuesday after the government's promise to uphold their assigned National Olympic Committee.  CNN states that Iraq will be able to hold their own election for a new national committee as late as November, 2008.  Because of the missed deadline last week, a few athletes will not participate, however, all media outlets are reporting that Iraqis are thrilled to be able to compete in China.  “We look forward to seeing the Iraqi flag in Beijing,” said IOC President, Jacques Rogge. 

Bush has agreed to “a general time horizon,” as The New York Times announced last week.  Many believe this is due to the pressure from the Iraqi government regarding a future US military presence in the country.  Unfortunately, we can't celebrate just yet, as the Bush Administration continues to be vague on the matter.  However, some of this decision will rest on Iraqi military capability, and the White House has stated that further troop reductions could come with increasingly better conditions.  Some officials claim that Iraqis should be taking charge of security by 2009, with a complete independence from the US by 2012.  Senator Obama responded to the news by saying it's ”a step in the right direction,” but believes the Administration is still being too vague.  Senator McCain continues to back Bush, stating that the timeline is proof of the success of the surge. 

After the bombing and riots in Kirkuk on Monday, which left 51 dead and over 250 injured (The Washington Post), Iraqi lawmakers have called for a special session to discuss disputes over the city, as reported by USA Today.  Kirkuk, an oil-rich and valuable area, has long been fought over by Arabs, Turkomen and Kurds.  The Kurds currently hold most of the power on the provincial council, and current tensions are coming from a new law that would require equal seats for all three groups.  Another aspect of this problem, and one that has been plaguing Iraq for many years now, are the Kurdish claims to Kirkuk as being a part of their semi-autonomous region.  However, Turkomen and Arabs, along with the rest of the Iraqi population, want to keep Kirkuk and its oil fields under central control and contributing to Iraqi finances.  The bombing, which attacked Kurds protesting the bill, set off sectarian violence on Monday as the Kurds then rioted at a Turkoman political site, blaming them for the attack. 

 
John McCain's Interview on NBC's The Today Show (YouTube excerpt)

If you’ve had any contact with the media this week, I’m sure you haven't been able to escape comments made about John McCain's interview on NBC's The Today Show. 

As I’m sure you all can tell by now, I have no plan on voting republican in the next election.  But I have to admit that what the media is doing to Senator McCain isn't fair.  Many people, including those uploading clips to YouTube, are cutting McCain's comments off to imply that he is simply unconcerned with the troops.  As my father (a military man and a republican) is always saying, McCain understands the plight of the US military more so than most people in this country, given his history as a prisoner of war during Vietnam.  I believe that when he says that the most important effort we should be making in Iraq is to minimize US casualties, he has a very valid point.  Our troops are not coming home tomorrow; therefore our first priority should be keeping them as safe as possible.  As the Senator continues, he states that the US has stationed troops in many countries with very few or no casualties.  And if we remember World War II correctly, nation rebuilding in Germany and Japan was achieved with the help of the Allied military. 

 As a liberal, I have criticisms of McCain.  Obviously, he is forced to back George W's policies, but does this also mean Bush's cowboy-style, over-militaristic attitude?  He also brags about advocating for the troop surge before Bush did.  This makes me wonder if he really does understand the military; many troops were not even getting the time off that is mandated by military doctrine prior to the surge. 

Another important criticism I have of McCain is his habit of misspeaking.  Obviously, troop numbers in Iraq should be important, and probably are important to the Senator.  When we listen to the rest of his comments, we begin to understand that he does not truly mean that a withdrawal is not important.  But once again, he phrased his comments the wrong way; the same thing happened with his “100 years in Iraq” comment.  After the past seven years, do we really want another president who constantly sticks his foot in his mouth? 

Click here for the full interview (on more topics than just Iraq).