Washington – The Iraqi government is likely to become even more precarious over the next six months, even though President Bush’s decision to send more troops has delivered “measurable” improvements in security, U.S. intelligence agencies concluded in an assessment of the situation in Iraq released Thursday.
“There have been measurable but uneven improvements in Iraq’s security situation” since the U.S. troop increase began this year, according to a document that represents the consensus of all 16 U.S. spy agencies. Even so, the report concludes, the level of violence in Iraq “remains high” and “Iraqi political leaders remain unable to govern effectively.”
The document, an update of a National Intelligence Estimate delivered earlier this year, represents the first comprehensive status report on the situation in Iraq since the troop increase and comes one month before a major assessment of the U.S. military commitment is due from Army Gen. David Petraeus, the U.S. military commander in Iraq.
Though cautiously worded and replete with caveats, the estimate presents a stark conclusion. Even though the troop increase has given the Iraqi government more breathing room, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and other leaders appear no closer to achieving the sort of political reconciliation necessary to keep the country from disintegrating.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the report confirmed that “our troops are mired in an Iraqi civil war and the president’s escalation strategy has failed to produce the political results he promised to our troops and the American people.”
“Every day that we continue to stick to the president’s flawed strategy is a day that America is not as secure as it could be,” Reid said.
As the end of the congressional recess draws closer, the debate over Iraq policy will only intensify, and the new intelligence assessment is likely to play an important role in that discussion.
Iraq remains riven because of the Shiites’ insecurity about retaining political dominance, “widespread Sunni unwillingness to accept a diminished political status,” various other sectarian rivalries and the work of terrorists, the report concluded. (The Shiites are in the majority in Iraq, but the Sunnis enjoyed a long period of dominance under Saddam Hussein, who was a Sunni.)
The assessment concluded that al-Maliki has retained support among Shiite groups in part because putting together a new government would be arduous. Officials in Washington and Baghdad have said for months that any military gains would be short-lived if Iraqi politicians were not able to bridge sectarian divides.
Al-Maliki has come under increasing criticism not just from Sunnis and Kurds but also from some other Shiites, the assessment said. What is more, the displacement of Iraqi civilians because of sectarian violence, plus the meddling of Iraq’s neighbors, notably Iran and Syria, portend further instability, the document stated.
New “bottom up” security initiatives, principally among Sunni Arabs and focused on combating terrorists, represent the best hope for improving security over the next six to 12 months, “but we judge these initiatives will only translate into widespread accommodation and enduring stability if the Iraqi government accepts and supports them,” the assessment concluded.
Al-Maliki lashed out at U.S. criticism, saying Wednesday that his country “can find friends elsewhere.”
The New York Times contributed to this report.
