The other day saw the last US combat troops leave Iraq, a couple of weeks ahead of President Obama's deadline of August 31 but seven years and five months after the Bush Administration ordered a wholesale and illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. It's been a bumpy ride for the world and, especially for Iraq, and it looks to turn even bumpier as the Americans withdraw. There is still no government following last spring's elections and insurgents are exploiting that imbroglio by stepping up suicide bombings and maximizing their victims. The Americans lost more than 4,400 in Iraq while their war left tens of thousands if not more than 100,000 Iraqis dead. In light of all these figures, the departure of the US combat mission must be welcomed both in Iraq and around the region. What could be frightening, however, is the state of Iraq if security so deteriorates that the country returns to civil war or something like it. The US has left 50,000 “non-combat” troops in Iraq. They are, of course, just as well-armed as those “combat” troops who have left. It may be more accurate to say simply that the US has reduced its troop levels in Iraq. That is definitely a positive move, but the withdrawal of the non-combat forces will be a slow process. There is already a vacuum at the top due to the dithering of Iraqi politicians in forming a government; it is best that the US not withdraw too quickly, thus leaving a power vacuum on the ground as well. Meanwhile, US troops will continue to support Iraqi security operations (when requested) and special forces will continue to lead the hunt for terrorists in Iraq. The reduction of US troops in Iraq to 50,000 is a milestone to mark but one which is still far from ultimate resolution. Only when the US completely withdraws from Iraq will the region have a chance to find its equilibrium, again. And we are a long way from that. __
