Many predicted the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group would advise President Bush to cut his losses and pull out from Iraq, pulling the carpet from beneath the government it has installed in Baghdad. Instead, the 79 recommendations the group produced encourage the US president to sink deeper into the Iraqi morass. Democrats and the Republicans have no regrets about the occupation, only about the way it was managed. Baker-Hamilton described their recommendations as pointing a pathway to success, avoiding the word "victory" of which Bush is so fond. They recommended dialogue with Syria and Iran as one of the painful sacrifices that will have to be made. The report does not seek a quick and honourable exit for US troops from Iraq. All it offers is an exercise in damage- limitation. It took months to debrief government officials, Congressmen and over 100 Iraqis, all of them pro-occupation. But withdrawal, whether in one stage or several stages, requires one decision, taken by President Bush. That's all that is needed. When Nixon admitted defeat in Vietnam, he pulled out within two months. The Baker-Hamilton Commission avoided setting a timetable for withdrawal, merely noting that it should begin in 2008. By 2008 President Bush will be off the hook since that is the year of presidential elections, and Bush cannot run for a third term. Until then he will have another go at achieving the victory he craves. The commission has done Bush a great service. It has given the US president the chance to formulate a bipartisan policy and thus salvage what remains of his popularity. There is nothing in the recommendations that Bush is likely to feel bound to reject, but then he doesn't, as Baker noted, have to deal with the report as a package deal. The US president is now engaged in talks with Congressional leaders in the House and is likely to announce a new strategy by the end of this month. The new strategy will not stray far from that currently embraced by the neocons. The Americans are likely to escalate battles against the Iraqi occupation. There are signs the Americans are preparing military plans that may involve the reoccupation of Baghdad. About 30,000 soldiers are being withdrawn from Al-Anbar for possible deployment in Baghdad, and the US is likely to send more troops to Iraq to bolster its military effort. Bush, and the hawks in his administration, believe such measures will allow the Iraqi government to emerge from the Green Zone and impose its control not only on Baghdad, but on the rest of Iraq. Baker-Hamilton recommended that occupation forces redeploy outside urban areas to 14 giant military bases around the country. The bases will provide facilities for 100,000 troops, and will cost $4.5 billion to build. Four will be built around or near Baghdad while the others will be in Mosul, Kirkuk, Tikrit, Falluja, Naqrat Al-Salman, Al-Saqr, Al-Nasiriya, and Al-Basra. The plan came as a disappointment to Jalal Talabani and Masoud Barazani, as no bases were planned near northern cities. The US is not going to engage the Iraqi resistance in dialogue. President Bush plans to lean mainly on the Shiites and the Kurds. This is why he invited Abdel-Aziz Al-Halim for talks, but postponed the visit to Washington by Tarek Al-Hashimi, the Sunni representative in the Iraqi presidency. It is significant that Al-Barazani has offered to send Kurdish fighters to Baghdad to protect the government. But a dialogue with Syria and Iran is not to be ruled out. The US wants to bolster its occupation of Iraq and Bush is not going to sneer at an offer for help from anyone. The Arab world is full of people willing to help the US president out.
