One of Ours

The deadliest illusion about warfare is that the aim of war is military victory. The true aim of war is to accomplish the political, economic or security goals for which it was fought. In a war competently waged for rational ends, one could rationally expect that America's aims would best be achieved through dominance on the battlefield followed by the dignified establishment of a new and better order. But in a war like the one in Iraq, which is based on assumptions since proven false, we cannot win by being victorious...

...at a minimum American interests require that the new Iraqi state not harbor terrorists or pose a threat to its neighbors; that it renounce nuclear weapons, long-range missiles and nerve gas; and that it exercise an effective monopoly on violence within its own territory...

...If America declares victory and brings its troops home, it leaves behind a government whose orders will not be obeyed. Instead, a disparate group of chieftains will draw legitimacy from a well of violence that may never run dry...Iraq will become like Afghanistan, a perilous mosaic of rival tribal principalities, a permanent refuge and breeding ground for terror...

...As long as heavily armed American soldiers have the ultimate say, Iraqis will never develop the sense of unity and responsibility necessary to a viable state. And without that unity, America is trapped in Iraq by the specter of civil war...

...The struggle against foreign occupation can generate the legitimacy needed to hold Iraq together. A leader who drives the Americans out can claim the loyalty of enough of the Iraqi people to govern Iraq...

...America must abandon its dream of victory and accept the appearance of defeat...the United States must take a cold, analytical look at the forces arrayed against us in Iraq and decide which leader should be allowed the glorious destiny of redeeming his country from foreign occupation. Once the United States has fixed on a credible resistance leader, our goal should be to cede him tactical, positional victories while denying them to his competitors...

...When the time comes, we will pull out completely, and an Iraqi leader will enter Baghdad in triumph...

...the Kurds will not be impressed by any savior from outside Kurdistan, so Turkish threats and U.S. promises will be needed to keep the Kurds within a federal Iraqi state. And no U.S. Congress would willingly appropriate reconstruction money for a country that defeated us...

...we will end up with a reasonably popular despot...

...By acknowledging the obvious -- that we are not absolutely omnipotent -- we actually make ourselves safer. We encourage our partners to increase their share of the burden, and we wean the Middle East and other repressive regions away from the psychopathology of blaming the United States for their own stagnation...

"Some officers say the place to begin restructuring U.S. policy is by ousting Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, whom they see as responsible for a series of strategic and tactical blunders over the past year. Several of those interviewed said a profound anger is building within the Army at Rumsfeld and those around him."