Keep Your Eye on the Ball...

Some hours ago I planned the post I was going to write today on the big news you weren't hearing much about: the bipartisan legislation introduced yesterday to trigger a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. Now it looks like that post may have been overtaken by events.

I'll just give a few quick links since I suspect my colleague Bill Roggio will soon provide additional information, but in just the last 24 hours we learned that the Shias and Sunnis both seem to want us out of Iraq (according to the leader of the Sadrist bloc, anyway), and that Congressional Republicans are telling the president that he has lost credibility and there are only a few months left to make lasting progress.

These are noteworthy events. But the latter, at least, likely will have little effect on the situation on the ground. It was being whispered some months ago that the White House recognized that by the end of this year, troops would have to be coming home from Iraq. Further, General Petraeus had said that it was reasonable to begin to assess the effectiveness of 'the surge' by the fall. It was never likely--given domestic political pressure--that Republicans or Democrats would wait any longer than that. The eagerness of some Republicans to be seen expressing frustration sends a message to the Iraqi government--perhaps an unhelpful one--but it changes little here. Secretly unhappy Republicans who were committed to waiting until the fall to pass judgment are now publicly unhappy Republicans who are waiting until fall to pass judgment.

So on to legislative matters.

The House continues to claim a stranglehold on pointless theater. Knowing full well that their funding bill is DOA, House leaders continue to press for it. That move has political consequences, as the anti-war left is already drawing up enemies lists--comprised mostly of the conservative Dem freshmen who brought the party its first majority in 12 years. A lot of these members have already taken tough votes that will be used against them in their campaigns next year; now some of them seem to be making enemies on the left. So much for gratitude.

Yet if the House bill is merely a distraction, what will the actual funding vehicle be?

There's a decent chance it will be some version of the Snowe-Bayh compromise introduced yesterday. Senator Snowe spoke about it yesterday on PBS:

And this bill provides that course through five fundamental means--it does not mandate a date-certain for withdrawal that could endanger the troops and that is also unacceptable to Republicans and some Democrats. It places the onus and the deadlines where they belong--on the Iraqi government, to achieve the benchmarks they've already pledged to fulfill and that we know are vital to securing Iraqi national reconciliation. And I think there is wide agreement that the implementation of benchmarks should be the lynchpin for our policy moving ahead.

These benchmarks include Iraqi assumption control of its military, disarming and demobilizing sectarian militias, holding a referendum on amendments to the constitution which ensure participation by all religious and ethnic groups, holding provincial elections, enacting oil revenue sharing, and reforming de-Ba'athification. These benchmarks are designed to ensure that all Iraqi minorities are protected, which is the only road to real stability.