Artículo
de
ONCE OUT OF BAGHDAD, HOPE TRUMPS THE DOUBTS
Artículo
de
Por su interés y relevancia, he seleccionado el artículo que sigue para incluirlo en este sitio web. (L. B.-B.)
To Army Sgt. Christopher
Suda, who patrols the uneasy streets around Mosul in northern Iraq, the United
States is winning and the insurgency is losing.
"We will continue to win as long as we continue to have the support
equipment and a leader who will ensure victory and instill confidence in the
mission," said Sgt. Suda, of the 276th Engineering Brigade. Sgt. Suda said he
has seen Iraq's police and national guard take over town after town in recent
months, allowing GIs to pull out.
"It's pretty cool to have them out
there doing that, especially since that's what the goal is, to have the Iraqis
running their own country," said Sgt. Suda, a National Guardsman.
But in Baghdad, where the Army's 1st Calvary Division is battling Sheik
Muqtada al-Sadr's fighters and Saddam Hussein holdouts, the optimism is fading,
one soldier told The Washington Times.
"In the beginning, I was pretty much an idealist. 'It's going to be a good
experience,' I told myself. Get to work on my skills, learn about these people,
and we're going to help them," said the soldier who has been in the Iraqi
capital more than eight months.
"I felt sorry for them," the soldier said. "That's changed. I've gone
through pretty much the whole spectrum. I've gone through periods of just hating
them. I don't want to see another one of them. It doesn't seem, no matter how
many of them you help, they just want to turn around and get you. Stab you in
the back or 'thanks for nothing' attitude."
The soldier, who asked not to be identified, said he has seen death many
times — and that the mission isn't worth it.
"There's nothing to be won, to be honest with you," the soldier said. "It's
my semi-educated opinion we're just standing by to be killed. We're not making
any progress. ... Common sense will tell you, when we leave, they're going to
have a civil war. There are too many types of Muslims."
The soldier in Mosul and the one in Baghdad mirror the debate on Iraq that
is going on back home.
To Sen. John Kerry's campaign, many Democrats and some television pundits,
the war that President Bush ordered in March 2003 to topple Saddam is a
disaster.
One year after the mixed bag of terrorists got organized and started
unleashing horrific attacks, the U.S. military death toll has topped 1,000; more
than 140 people have been kidnapped and some beheaded; and the most active
terrorist in Iraq, Abu Musab Zarqawi, remains active and elusive.
It has been nearly 18 months since U.S. tanks rolled into Baghdad, yet some
cities remain "no-go" zones, including Fallujah, where Zarqawi's terror
operation trains and deploys suicide bombers.
The U.S. intelligence community prediction, known as the National
Intelligence Estimate, says the mayhem could get worse, pulling the country into
a civil war next year, according to the New York Times last month.
Secretary of State Colin L. Powell says the violence will increase, not
subside, as Iraq's first national, post-Saddam elections, scheduled for January,
get closer. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said in a radio interview last
week, "We expect that the violence will continue to escalate somewhat between
now and the time of the elections in Iraq."
But amid the violence, a series of positive developments unfolds daily,
including the United Nations' sponsoring of an interim government led by Iyad
Allawi. The top commander in the region, Gen. John Abizaid, says Washington
critics and the press have it wrong.
"Every now and then in Washington, we need to take a deep breath and we need
to look at what's happening in the region as opposed to the reports of one or
two journalists that happen to think that everybody in Iraq is in the
resistance," Gen. Abizaid said a week ago on NBC's "Meet the Press."
"The constant drumbeat in Washington of a war that is being lost, that can't
be won, of a resistance that is out of control, simply do not square with the
facts on the ground," the general said.
In interviews the past week with more than a half-dozen military officers
and policy-makers, The Washington Times found doubts about how the battle will
proceed, but a degree of confidence about the final outcome.
"Iraq is a mixed bag," said a senior Pentagon official and Bush supporter.
"You see only the exciting things. I know this sounds like a trite, conservative
catechism, but I see the reports every day — the good, the bad, the ugly. We are
making good progress, and the bad guys are trying their hardest to [stop it]."
The question of who is winning in the daily struggle between the U.S.-led
coalition and the terrorists is difficult to measure.
The State Department each week updates a written briefing on what it
considers progress in the country. There are facts such as these: Iraq has 1.57
million phone subscribers, up 91 percent from pre-war levels; oil production has
exceeded the pre-war peak of 2.5 million barrels per day; the Iraqi Independent
Electoral Commission has completed a draft voter list; and instructions will go
out this week to Iraqis on how to register.
This type of economic development, coupled with free elections and the
planned buildup of indigenous security forces to about 200,000, forms the Bush
administration's long-term strategy for winning Iraq.
Mr. Rumsfeld expanded on this last month.
"I use the word 'tip.' When does it tip?" Mr. Rumsfeld told The Washington
Times, suggesting that at some point Iraqi civilian resentment of terrorist
attacks would result in "more and more intelligence information," leading to
"pressure ... so great that [the terrorists] lose recruits."
From his perch near Mosul, Sgt. Suda sees this scenario playing out.
"There are a lot more Iraqi police and Iraqi national guard than in previous
months, and even places like Tal Afar [west of Mosul], where we just recently
went on an offensive, the Iraqi security forces are running that town primarily
now, not us," Sgt. Suda said.
"We help out when they need us."