The closer the date of the US military withdrawal from Iraq (August 31), the greater people’s nervousness. They keep an eye on the death toll and say: it is going to be worse when the Americans leave. Who can blame them? But it is too late anyway. The invasion was an American decision, but the pullout was an Iraqi requirement.

Even former Saddam deputy, Tarik Aziz, is now wishing America to stay in Iraq. Unbelievable! Just like Lieut. General Babaker Zebari: the Iraqi army would not be able to ensure the country’s security until 2020, he said. Both are high-ranking officials of two antithetic regimes in the same country, and both seem worried.

Today, every human being endowed with reason feels concern about the tragic situation of the Iraqi people, long oppressed by a little political elite (the Baath party), and still oppressed by terrorists, warlords, warmongers and other corrupt politicians, not to mention moral or physical humiliation by the US occupation forces. The situation seems almost hopeless, seven years after the fall of Saddam. Blasts continue to kill dozens of civilians, but police agents and military personnel are not spared. Coincidentally, the withdrawal of the US forces will happen in Ramadan, and as you know, violence tends to increase in the holy month.

Although the US official sources mention a decline in casualties since the summer 2007, due to General Petraeus (then US military commander) attempt to split the Iraqi Sunnis from their Al Qaeda allies, by providing them money and guns, “despite uneasiness on the part of the Maliki regime,” and the death or capture of some leaders of the terrorist network, Al Qaeda did not recognise defeat. On the contrary, it is expecting the pullout of the US forces to reoccupy the field. According to the Guardian (August 10), Al Qaeda is “attempting to make a comeback in Iraq by enticing scores of former Sunni allies to rejoin the terrorist group.”  The deal is to pay them “more than the monthly salary they currently receive from the government.”

A worse situation may follow the withdrawal, even with a strong government willing to fight terrorism and to enforce law. That would mean the country cannot digest democracy, which is exactly what the rebels, the radicals of Al Qaeda, and so many fanatics wish.

Sure enough, the remaining Baathists would not allow democracy to succeed in this country: first, because  they are not allowed to take part to the political game; and second, because any success for a regime still intent on chasing them means the end of any hope for future presence in governmental institutions. So, for them, the way in is armed resistance.

As to the Islamist radicals, this is a matter of principle. In the own words of Sheikh Abdullah Al Faisal (published on July 11, 2010 by ‘the Muslim Defense Force’): “Democracy is the greatest shirk [polytheism] as it is the government of the people for the people and by the people...” For them, a good Muslim should not accept democracy. Period. For them too, the way in is to maintain Iraq under pressure, by repeating the massacres and waging an attrition war against any government present and to come.

Today, unfortunately security seems prevailing not democracy as the highest priority in Iraq. The invasion paved the way for a tragic explosion of violence that turned into an infernal vicious circle.

The question about whether Iraq will be a viable state over the long run is the real test. The inability of the Iraqi political elite, so far, to meet the date of the US withdrawal with a sound democratic government is most worrying. Actually if this new governmental elite wished to prove to its opponents its incompetence, it wouldn’t find a better way to make it clear than to remain in this shadowy state of doubt, hesitation, and powerlessness. A power vacuum is a call for subversion, sedition and coups. Had Iraq already ceased to be a unified state, as some contend?

Oddly enough, wishful thinking today consists in saying: the US will never leave Iraq. Recently, a news analysis, assumed: “the reality in Iraq may defy the deadline” of the pullout. Several Iraqis and Americans think this way. Among them, Ryan C. Crocker, American ambassador in Baghdad until 2009, who “helped to negotiate the agreement that tethers the two countries and mandates that all American troops leave Iraq by the end of 2011.”(The New York Times, August 11)  Even Hoshyar Zibari, Iraqi Foreign Minister reportedly acknowledged that Iraq is not able to defend itself, without American assistance.

But although nobody denies the existence of important interests at stake, delaying the withdrawal is not a good idea for Obama, with midterm elections on the agenda.  Of course, Iraq is not much of an issue in the internal political debate and nobody would be elected on his stance regarding this war. But, if badly tackled, this issue may alienate potential voters for Democrats. There are reasons for this.

Since March 2003, “Gallup has asked Americans on 79 different occasions whether the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq, compared to having asked the same question about Afghanistan only nine times since November 2001,” says a Gallup report issued in 2009. They explain this obvious emphasis on Iraq by the fact that this country “dominated news coverage and political debate” since 2003, making of Afghanistan almost a “forgotten war.” So, Obama administration cannot afford to underestimate the American public opinion concerning this war. And the fact is that Americans are more and more prone to say “the US involvement in Iraq was a mistake.” (58% in 2009).

So, is there a way out? Yes, and maybe it is also the only way in:

The Iraqis should put away ideological divergences and partisan and sectarian interests if they want a National Union government able to cope with the urgencies and the high priorities of the situation.