Staying the course

If the U.S. perseveres long enough, we can leave behind an 'Iraq good enough'

In short, there are good reasons to support President Barack Obama and U.S. military commanders in keeping U.S. forces strong enough to help secure Iraq for the coming national election, and phasing down U.S. forces at the rate the president has planned for. There are good reasons to leave a strong residual force in Iraq that can train the Iraqi security forces, and provide assistance in areas such as intelligence and air support as the Iraqi forces take over.

There are good reasons to offer Iraq continued U.S. military training assistance after 2011, and to keep a U.S. aid presence to help Iraq make the transition from aid to self-reliance. Iraq also remains a key oil power and a key factor in Persian Gulf security at a time when gulf oil will remain critical to the recovery of the U.S. and global economy.

Moreover, quite aside from such practical concerns, the U.S. has a moral obligation to Iraq.

This does not mean open-ended commitments, or that we can save Iraq from itself if Iraqis turn on each other. It does not mean giving massive new aid, accepting high American casualties or failing to significantly reduce U.S. spending from its peak of $7 billion a month. The U.S. does, however, have to stay long enough to help Iraq - and it cannot ignore its potential obligations under the strategic agreement it signed with Iraq in 2008.

Some new aid programs may be needed, as well as efforts to protect Iraq from its neighbors and to help with debt relief, reparations problems and future issues with the International Monetary Fund.

"Iraq good enough" is well worth having, and it means the U.S. staying long enough.

Anthony H. Cordesman holds the Arleigh A. Burke chair in strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. His e-mail is [e-mail].