Posted By Peter Feaver Share

I attended the same academic conference that fellow ForeignPolicy.com bloggers Dan Drezner  and Steve Walt mentioned in their blogs. As I tell my students, several thousand International Relations professors in the same hotel for several days is not as much fun as it sounds, but with hundreds of panels on every conceivable topic, it can be exceptionally stimulating.

My biggest takeaway this year was the extraordinarily low profile given to Iraq, at least current-day Iraq. There were many panels and papers dealing with the invasion of Iraq, almost as many dealing with the mistakes made in the conduct of the war, a small handful of papers dealing with the tough calls that turned out better than expected (eg., the surge), but very few indeed dealing with the current situation and none that I saw with concrete, practical guidance on what to do going forward. Ironically, in this respect the academy was simply following the foreign policy pundit world, which has likewise let Iraq drop from the agenda. To be sure, Tom Ricks faithfully flags adverse developments in his "Iraq: the Unraveling" series but the only time the war emerged recently as a matter of much discussion among the commentariat  was when Vice President Biden awkwardly tried to claim Iraq as one of the great foreign policy successes of the Obama Administration.

Most commentators zinged Biden for claiming credit for the surge policy he and President Obama tried to thwart as senators back in 2007, but what struck me about Biden's boasting was how premature it was -- almost as if he were claiming "mission accomplished" while there was plenty of hard work still to do. However, as Jackson Diehl argues, Biden may be the only political leader in Washington who is paying much attention to the Iraq situation.

Senior figures in the Defense Department and U.S. military leaders on the ground in Iraq have signaled that they are watching closely to determine whether conditions on the ground will permit sticking with the withdrawal timetable negotiated by President Bush in the 2008 Status of Forces Agreement. Apparently, they still estimate that conditions will allow a responsible withdrawal, but the mere fact that they are signaling concern should be, well, concerning for our political leaders. 

The desire of the political community to put Iraq in the rear-view mirror is understandable, but misguided. The national security challenges that are receiving front-burner attention -- especially Afghanistan and Iran -- are integrally linked to the policy trajectory in Iraq. Since the fateful surge decision, the Iraq policy trajectory has been far more positive than anyone, academics or practitioners, thought likely. But the progress remains reversible and if Iraq unravels, then all of the other national security problems will get that much more difficult to address. 

The theme of the academic conference was bridging the gap between academics and practitioners. In taking the collective eye off the ball on Iraq, it seems academics and practitioners may be unfortunately all-too-much in synch. 

TAUSEEF MUSTAFA/AFP/Getty Images

EXPLORE:IRAQ
 

ZATHRAS

4:30 AM ET

February 24, 2010

Is There a Point Here?

Academics and pundits have not improved American policy toward Iraq so far. If they are inattentive to the subject now, that's probably for the best.

As for the Obama administration, the responsible officials are tending to Iraqi political developments as best they can, while managing their most important task. This is winding down the American military commitment in Iraq, which was begun by people in the last administration who did not count its cost at the start and are not doing it now. Meanwhile the rest of the administration, including the President, are devoting time and attention to subjects other than the daily affairs of one, mid-sized Arab country. This was common practice in all administrations before the last few years.

Apart from that, I notice that Peter Feaver has no policy recommendations to make here. All he has to offer is a warning about taking our collective eye off the ball, which doesn't mean anything.

 

PATRIOT 333

10:32 AM ET

February 25, 2010

the point should be

I'm not sure Biden is an 'expert' on anything in foreign policy, despite or perhaps because of his lengthy terms in the Senate. How many times can he get to be wrong and keep moving up the ladder??? He was against the first invasion back in '91 in Iraq (I was there), which practically the whole world supported under Pres G H W Bush, he wanted to divide Iraq into sectarian regions; and then he was against the surge. How incompetent in foreign policy/ war can you get?
Meanwhile, this administration is focused on healthcare while another arab country, IRAN, is without a doubt trying to develop nuclear weapons with a delivery system to go with it. The most important duty of a president is National Security and this administration dithers with engagement while a terrorist supporting (Hezbollah), human rights violating, 'wipe Israel off the map' dictator could literally start a nuclear war or cause a nuclear incident via a terrorist group in the near future. We sure need another Reagan; I just hope we have enough time.

 

Shadow Government is a blog about U.S. foreign policy under the Obama administration, written by experienced policy makers from the loyal opposition and curated by Peter D. Feaver and William Inboden.

Read More