Well, wouldn't you know it? Facing the catastrophic consequences of his bullheadedness in Iraq, President Bush is pulling in his horns in terms of what he can deliver. Lowering the expectations bar is the only way to understand this.
According to a front-page story in today's Washington Post by Karen DeYoung and Thomas E. Ricks, the administration is "shaving the yardstick for Iraq gains" and expects to promote "smaller gains" as signs of success.
Just how small are these gains? Elementary school "show and tell" sessions sound about right. More below the jump.
The story's lead pretty much tells it all:
The Iraqi government is unlikely to meet any of the political and security goals or timelines President Bush set for it in January when he announced a major shift in U.S. policy, according to senior administration officials closely involved in the matter.
Unlikely to meet any of the goals or timelines. Sounds about right. The penny's finally dropped. What's the alternative? Well, let's start cooking the books in the September report Congress demanded. Congress was dumb enough to follow us once; maybe it will again. This September report will not have a lot to show or tell:
...the administration will report that Sunni tribal leaders in Anbar province are turning against the group al-Qaeda in Iraq in growing numbers; that sectarian killings were down in June; and that Iraqi political leaders managed last month to agree on a unified response to the bombing of a major religious shrine, officials said.
Sectarian killings down? What are all these bombings that we read about? How about the fact that the number of American dead is rising? I think you're missing the point, fellows.
And these efforts to avoid the evidence of their own eyes aren't nearly as impressive as the goals and benchmarks Dubya promised when he announced the "surge." At that point, he was promising provincial elections, new power-sharing legislation, and the ability of the Maliki government to take care of its own security. How did it go from the Iraqis taking care of their own security to the Iraqis being able to agree that it's not nice to bomb mosques and religious shrines?
Actually, even Bush's original benchmarks were only the beginning. In the media rush to proclaim Bush's victory over the Democrats in forcing funding of the "surge," most of the news accounts of the time neglected to fully describe the conditions the Democrats laid down. DeYoung and Ricks don't repeat that mistake here. The Democrats expectations (and what the Senate Republicans are now getting nervous about) are pretty clear:
In addition to the elections, legislation and security measures Bush outlined in January, Congress added demands that the Iraqi government complete a revision of its constitution and pass a law on de-Baathification and additional laws on militia disarmament, regional boundaries and other issues.
Lawmakers asked for an interim report in July and set a Sept. 15 deadline for a comprehensive assessment by Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and Ryan C. Crocker, the U.S. ambassador. Now, as U.S. combat deaths have escalated, violence has spread far beyond Baghdad, and sectarian political divides have deepened, the administration must persuade lawmakers to use more flexible, less ambitious standards.
Well, as we know, the Iraqi parliament has copied Dubya in providing itself with such generous vacations that it can't get any of that done.
Apparently General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker plan to argue the self-evident to justify continuing the war. Security and politics are intertwined, they will point out to the solons on Capitol Hill (a thought that would probably have not occurred to them otherwise), and we need more time to get the security stuff straightened out, after which the politics will take care of itself. Or, if we can straighten out the politics, the security stuff will take care of itself. Or,if we can get the stoves to work in the embassy, we can cook meals for the troops. Or something.
It's hard to believe this will sell very well. Republicans are already jumping ship. We can expect more of that. They stood up for Dubya once on this, this year; they're not likely to do it again.
The polls. The political timetable. Being thrown under the bus by Bush with the Scooter Libby travesty. The Iraq embassy debacle, with the kitchens that burst into flames. Looks like time is finally running out on Dubya. The jig is up:
As they work to put together the reports due to Congress next week and in September...officials and others close to Iraq policy recognize that the administration is boxed in by measurements that were enshrined in U.S. law in May.