×
... the Iraqis. As Andrew Exum notes, it's depressingly rare that policy ideas from actual Iraqis are found in the D.C. conversation, and to that effect he flags this report [PDF] from a group of Iraqi academics that was facilitated by a Norwegian think tank. The initial assessment is not super positive:
Unless the international community alters its approach, a protracted conflict between an Iran-supported Iraqigovernment and various insurgency groups (including some with inspiration from al-Qaeda) seems like the most probable five-year scenario for Iraq. As a consequence, the geopolitical point of gravity in the region can be expected to shift towards Tehran, with an accompanying escalation of regional tensions as well as likely disruptions to world energy supply.The report opens with the argument that while the surge was successful militarily, it failed politically -- surely not a strange argument to anyone reading this blog -- and then attempts to outline specific steps toward political reforms that ensure a strong, united state remains as U.S. forces draw down and leave permanently in 2011. The authors reject what they see as a primarily Western assumption that ethnic conflict is the primary factor in Iraqi politics and urge further centralization and professionalization of the government -- particularly to eliminate the fiefdoms springing up around individual ministries -- and perhaps most controversially the removal of "ethno-sectarian" quotas from government structures. There is a focus on putting Iraqi solutions and Iraqi actors into power. The specific policy proposals revolve around the December 2009 parliamentary elections and actions that the U.S., the Iraqi government and regional players can take in that context to ensure viable political reform in Iraq. It's really very interesting and I think you should read the whole report.
-- Tim Fernholz
