William Shawcross writes in the Guardian on the Iraqi elections:
There were lamentable failures in the subsequent US occupation, which allowed the rise of the hideous sectarian violence that threatened to tear the country to pieces. But in the last two years the "surge" of US troops under General David Petraeus appears to have destroyed much of the terrorists' infrastructure and support. Now, as US troops begin their phased withdrawal, the new American-trained Iraqi army is defending the country against Islamist violence.
There will be further setbacks. But who knows, Iraq may yet even become a model for democratic change in other Arab countries. If so, who deserves some credit? The much maligned President Bush. And Tony Blair.
For the defeatists who two years ago believed that a military solution to the violence and chaos in Iraq was impossible -- and Obama must be included among them -- now is the time for revision. According to Joe Klein, Maliki and his Dawa party succeeded in these elections because "he wooed and won Muqtada al-Sadr supporters." That's a funny way to describe a strategy that, last April, Klein was attacking as "the Maliki government's recent abortive offensive against Sadr's forces in Basra." In fact, the offensive was just one of many tactical success facilitated by the surge of U.S. forces ordered by President Bush and almost universally opposed by his betters at Time, Newsweek, and the New York Times.
Imagine if Obama and Klein had had their way in January of 2007. Where would Iraq be now?
