An Exit Strategy Project?

Global Review has followed the downward trajectory of the war in Iraq over the past four years. On March 11, 2003, I explained my opposition to military action. On On May 9, 2003, I reprinted the UN resolution restoring Iraq to its place among nations. August 19, 2004, I noted that the U.S. was preparing to annihilate Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army in Najaf. On July 18, 2005, I was optimistic about Iraq's chances, noting "Shi'ite forbearance" toward Al-Qaeda violence. On November 21, 2006, Global Review adopted the term 'civil war' to describe Iraq's current state.

And today, Global Review calls for the beginning of a serious discussion of exit strategy. Some will say we should have discussed this one, two, three, or four years ago. Perhaps so. But what's certainly true is that very few have made this part of the public debate. Most of the war-related discussion is unproductive nattering about whether and when to end it. But how? That's rarely discussed.

Some discussion starters: Casey and I saw the documentary Iraq in Fragments last week. Somewhat outdated, the film portrayed Sunnis as disengaged and depressed, Shi'ites as messianic and unchecked, and Kurds as happy mountain shepherds. I will leave to Casey the task of a full-length review, but will add to the movie's intensely personal perspective the broad view, as provided by U.S. statesman Richard Holbrooke, writing in Irbil.

This peaceful city is disorienting: Am I in war-torn Iraq or booming Kurdistan? Will Irbil eventually become the capital (or part) of an independent Kurdistan? Or will this region become a battleground for another war, this one between Kurds and Turks?

You can call this place Kurdistan, as its citizens do, or northern Iraq, as the Turks do. But either way, the overwhelming majority (98 percent in a 2005 referendum) of its 4 million people do not want to remain part of Iraq. Who can blame them? Nothing here feels like the Middle East. The Iraqi national flag is banned; only the Kurdistan flag flies.

Kurdistan has two faces. To America, it shows the happy, smiling face of Wilsonian progress. To its neighbors - all of them - it shows the face of Salah ed-Din, conqueror and Kurd. A key element of any exit strategy will be keeping the Kurds from going to war with their neighbors.

Holbrooke suggests something approaching a condominium with Turkey. There's no way that is going to be acceptable to the Kurds: too much bad blood. Who do the Kurds love? America. Believe it or not, there are a few places where Americans are loved and welcomed. "New Europe" is one of them; Kurdistan is another. American troops can protect Kurdistan and help it slowly build up its ties to Turkish ports and markets. When the fate of southern Iraq is known, we can either ease the Kurds back into a peaceful Iraq, or support their secession from a failed or dictatorial state.

That's the easy part. Any ideas for how America can extricate herself from the South?