Hey Obama: Take A Hint

In a follow-up to my last post on the remarkable progress in Iraq and possible challenges for Barack Obama's current "I opposed the surge and still oppose it and the war is a failure" stance, I offer in good faith this presentation that senior Brookings Institution fellows Michael O'Hanlon and Kenneth Pollack gave today:

(Note: "Neither man can be accused of shilling for either the administration or John McCain for numerous reasons: both have been strong critics of the war and O’Hanlon opposed the war and still believes on balance it has not made us safer.")

O’Hanlon explained that the last three months has been the “spring of the blossoming of Iraqi security forces” and Iraq is on an “impressive trajectory” although we have not yet “reached a stable end point.” He stressed that the 80% reduction in civilian violence was much better than he thought possible. He went through a detailed review of Basra, conceding that Maliki’s actions took the Americans by surprise and that in the first week things went poorly. However, by the second week two brigades were deployed from Al Anbar (a testimony to massive improvements in Iraq security force logistics) and that the mission was successful, allowing the Iraqi army and national police force to now control the streets of Basra.

Pollack echoed these observations, saying that “The headline was the emergence of Iraqi security forces.” He explained that the fundamental shift from Americans leading with Iraqis in support to Iraqis leading not just “hold” but “clear” operations is now “well underway.” He observes that sectarian divisions within the military are receding as mixed Sunni and Shia units have been successful in Basra and Mosul operations. He sees vast improvement in military leadership which “is one of the main reasons for improvement” in the security situation.

He credits the military success with allowing for a “fundamental rearrangement” of Iraqi politics, observing that Maliki is now “flying high” with new found respect from Sunnis. The big picture take away, he says, it that having achieved remarkable success with major issues we now can begin to address “second and third order problems” such as insuring that military forces “stay in their lane” and do not subvert civilian leadership

Indeed.

When O'Hanlon was asked by Rubin (the author of this article and a conservative commentator) if his previous criticism about Barack Obama being "in denial" about Iraq still stood, both presenters went out of their way to avoid any outright criticism of the Democratic candidate, but offered this advice:

...they were quite tactful and even optimistic that this is a time when political leaders can reorient themselves to new facts. [me: I like that phrasing] Both indicated that it would be a mistake with critical provincial and national elections upcoming in 2008 and 2009 to begin an abrupt withdrawal in 2009. O’Hanlon offered that Democrats could take credit for having pressured Iraqis on a political front with the clear message that out presence would not be indefinite and that they should accept that “the good news is you may be able to leave earlier than proposed based on progress and not on defeat.”

...which is precisely what I suggested in my previous post. Obama has numerous and significant advantages over John McCain in just about every aspect of this election cycle, but I believe he could lose the election over this issue if he refuses to adjust his position to realities on the ground. As Rubin notes:

...the wisdom of the war and the mismanagement of the war for a number of years needs, for the sake of the country’s national security, to be separated from what we do now. As O’Hanlon said “we are where we are.”

I was previously pessimistic about the possibility for Obama to face reality and still save face, but the suggestion that Democrats could "take credit for having pressured Iraqis" is a decent opportunity for Obama.

He should take it.