[NYTr] Buchanan: This Is How Empires End

[nytr at olm.blythe-systems.com]

AntiWaar.com - Jul 20, 2007
http://www.antiwar.com/pat/?articleid=11319

This Is How Empires End

by Patrick J. Buchanan

Responding to the call of Pope Urban II at Claremont in 1095, the
Christian knights of the First Crusade set out for the Holy Land. In
1099, Jerusalem was captured. As their port in Palestine, the Crusaders
settled on Acre on the Mediterranean.

There they built the great castle that was overrun by Saladin in 1187,
but retaken by Richard the Lion-Hearted in 1191. Acre became the capital
of the Kingdom of Jerusalem and the stronghold of the Crusader state,
which fell to the Mameluks in a bloody siege in 1291. The Christians
left behind were massacred.

The ruins of Acre are now a tourist attraction.

Any who have visited this last outpost of Christendom in the Holy Land
before Gen. Allenby marched into Jerusalem in 1917 cannot  on reading
of the massive U.S. embassy rising in Baghdad  but think of Acre.

At a cost of $600 million, with walls able to withstand mortar and
rocket fire, and space to accommodate 1,000 Americans, this mammoth
embassy, largest on earth, will squat on the banks of the Tigris inside
the Green Zone.

But, a decade hence, will the U.S. ambassador be occupying this imperial
compound? Or will it be like the ruins of Acre?

What raises the question is a sense the United States, this time, is
truly about to write off Iraq as a lost cause.

The Republican lines on Capitol Hill are crumbling. Starting with
Richard Lugar, one GOP senator after another has risen to urge a
drawdown of U.S. forces and a diplomatic solution to the war.

But this is non-credible. How can U.S. diplomats win at a conference
table what 150,000 U.S. troops cannot secure on a battlefield?

Though Henry Kissinger was an advocate of this unnecessary war, he is
not necessarily wrong when he warns of "geopolitical calamity." Nor is
Ryan Crocker, U.S. envoy in Iraq, necessarily wrong when he says a U.S.
withdrawal may be the end of the American war, but it will be the start
of bloodier wars in Iraq and across the region.

Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari also warns of the perils of a
rapid withdrawal: "The dangers vary from civil war to dividing the
country to regional wars ... the danger is huge. Until the Iraqi forces
and institutions complete their readiness, there is a responsibility on
the U.S. and other countries to stand by the Iraqi government and the
Iraqi people to help build up their capabilities."

In urging a redeployment of U.S. forces out of Iraq, and a new focus on
diplomacy, Lugar listed four strategic goals. Prevent creation of a safe
haven for terrorists. Prevent sectarian war from spilling out into the
broader Middle East. Prevent Iran's domination of the region. Limit the
loss of U.S. credibility through the region and world as a result of a
failed mission in Iraq.

But how does shrinking the U.S. military power and presence in Iraq
advance any of these goals?

Longtime critics of the war like Gen. William Odom say it is already
lost, and fighting on will only further bleed the country and make the
ultimate price even higher. The general may be right in saying it is
time to cut our losses. But we should take a hard look at what those
losses may be.

It is a near certainty the U.S.-backed government will fall and those we
leave behind will suffer the fate of our Vietnamese and Cambodian
friends in 1975. As U.S. combat brigades move out, contractors, aid
workers and diplomats left behind will be more vulnerable to
assassination and kidnapping. There could be a stampede for the exit and
a Saigon ending in the Green Zone.

The civil and sectarian war will surely escalate when we go, with Iran
aiding its Shi'ite allies and Sunni nations aiding the Sunnis. A breakup
of the country seems certain. Al-Qaeda will claim it has run the U.S.
superpower out of Iraq and take the lessons it has learned to Jordan,
Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states. The Turks, with an army already on the
border, will go in to secure their interests in not having the Kurdish
PKK operating from Iraq and in guaranteeing there is no independent
Kurdistan. What will America do then?

As for this country, the argument over who is responsible for the worst
strategic debacle in American history will be poisonous.

With a U.S. defeat in Iraq, U.S. prestige would plummet across the
region. Who will rely on a U.S. commitment for its security? Like the
British and French before us, we will be heading home from the Middle
East.

What we are about to witness is how empires end.

COPYRIGHT CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.