"THE MORE successful we are on the ground, the more these killers will react." So said President George W. Bush on Monday, after a series of suicide bombings in Baghdad that left at least 34 dead and more than 200 wounded.
Such logical acrobatics are nothing new from an administration that has gone to absurd lengths to cast its dismal occupation of Iraq in a positive light. But coming as they did on a day of horrible violence, Bush's remarks might lead Americans to wonder how he defines "success on the ground."
By any common sense definition, success on the ground should include the defeat of Iraqi insurgents who are carrying out attacks on American forces and other targets throughout the country. Through the arrest of terrorists, the seizure of weapons and the general disruption of opposition forces, the American occupation should be steadily degrading the ability of Iraqi resistors to carry out major attacks.
But, by all indications, Iraqi opposition groups are growing stronger and their attacks more sophisticated. Monday's violence included a missile attack on Baghdad's Al-Rashid Hotel as well as the suicide bombings of the Red Cross headquarters and four Iraqi police stations. The bombings occurred within 45 minutes of each other, suggesting that Iraqi insurgents are a well coordinated group far from the disaffected loners the administration has portrayed them as.
Another aspect of success on the ground is the provision of freedom and material comfort to the Iraqi people. Bush made reference to these efforts on Monday, saying that "the more free Iraqis become, the more electricity is available, the more kids that are going to school, the more desperate these killers become, because they can't stand the thought of a free society."
America has indeed begun to rebuild Iraq, but progress has been slow and fitful. According to the World Bank, Iraq's reconstruction will require $36 billion more than the $20 billion that the United States has already promised. And given the poor state of America's public finances and the reluctance of the international community to contribute to a reconstruction process over which it has no control, it seems unlikely that more money is coming soon.
But even if Iraq were flush with cash, terrorism would stand in the way of its reconstruction. America's inability to provide for the security of international aid workers has led many organizations to withdraw their personnel from Iraq, while constant attacks on local officials have led Iraqis to think twice about cooperating with occupation forces. The result is a climate of fear and uncertainty in which Iraqis and foreigners alike are unwilling to assist in the reconstruction process. And, contrary to Bush's belief, Iraq's children are not all returning to school. According to The New York Times, Iraqi schoolgirls could be seen fleeing the scene of one of Monday's bombings, "eyes wide, screaming in terror."
So what, then, is success on the ground? In light of the America's persistent failure to secure and rebuild Iraq, it is, perhaps, merely a figment of Bush's imagination. And as the administration's imagination grows increasingly distant from reality, its public pronouncements grow more insulting to the American people. Terrorist bombings are not a sign of success -- they are, quite plainly, a sign of America's failure to halt terrorist activities and restore Iraq to a level of prosperity that would render terrorism unattractive.
On Sunday, L. Paul Bremer, III, America's top civilian administrator in Iraq, told ABC News that terrorist attacks are not necessarily a sign of increasing instability. "We certainly had a bad day," he said, "And as I have stressed all along, we are going to have good days and bad days." But rather than regarding Iraq as a convalescent dropped inexplicably into America's care, the administration should speak plainly and measure itself by real standards of progress. If Monday's attacks are a sign of success, it's time we started failing.
(Alec Solotorovsky is a Cavalier Daily associate editor. He can be reached at asolotorovsky@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PARTING SHOT: On the art of walking and chewing gum
By Nathan Onibudo | YesterdayStudent journalism, and maybe even life more generally, is about holding space for multiple conflicting truths.
PARTING SHOT: Confessions of a nepo baby
By Grace Thrush | 2 days agoWhile I can’t point to one specific “aha” moment where I finally started to dispel my self-consciousness and claim my pride for the paper, I got there gradually over the course of my term as managing editor.
PARTING SHOT: Asked and answered
By Honor Wood | 2 days agoLooking back, the answer has been abundantly clear all along. I did it for the people.
