McCain, Obama Now Agree on Iraq! (Kinda, Sorta)

Did John McCain just endorse the Obama plan for Iraq?

In a speech given earlier today in Columbus, Ohio, McCain laid out what he "would hope to have achieved at the end of my first term as President." First on the list: "By January 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom."

*The Iraq War has been won. Iraq is a functioning democracy, although still suffering from the lingering effects of decades of tyranny and centuries of sectarian tension. Violence still occurs, but it is spasmodic and much reduced. Civil war has been prevented; militias disbanded; the Iraqi Security Force is professional and competent; al Qaeda in Iraq has been defeated; and the Government of Iraq is capable of imposing its authority in every province of Iraq and defending the integrity of its borders. The United States maintains a military presence there, but a much smaller one, and it does not play a direct combat role.
*

Obama has also said he wants to get most American forces out of Iraq -- and a whole lot sooner than 2013, if possible. During a debate last fall, Obama said he would take out the "combat troops," at a rate of "one brigade to two brigades out per month...The only troops that would remain would be those that have to protect
U.S. bases and U.S. civilians, as well as to engage in counterterrorism activities in Iraq."

But Obama was then asked if he would "pledge that by January 2013, the end of your first term more than five years from now, there will be no U.S. troops in Iraq?" Obama's answer: Nope.

*I think it's hard to project four years from now, and I think it would be irresponsible. We don't know what contingency will be out there.
What I can promise is that... I will drastically reduce our presence there to the mission of protecting our embassy, protecting our civilians and making sure that we're carrying out counterterrorism activities there. I believe that we should have all our troops out by 2013, but I don't want to make promises not knowing what the situation's going to be three or four years out. *

So one guy is plotting a future where the U.S. "does not pla[y] a combat role" in Iraq by 2013. The other wants to take out the "combat troops" by then. One hopes "most of the servicemen" are home in 2013.
The other is looking to withdraw forces, but leave behind personnel for base protection and counterterrorism -- missions could easily require thousands and thousands of soldiers, marines, and special forces.
Sounds pretty similar, right?

Now, McCain has left himself a pretty enormous out, with a list of preconditions ("The Iraq War bas been won... Iraq is a functioning democracy... Civil war has been prevented") that are going to be difficult in the extreme to reach.
McCain hopes to have Iraq solved by then. He also wants a "flat tax"
and "schools [that] have greatly improved their emphasis on physical education and nutritional content of meals."

But Obama -- or, at least, those on his informal foreign policy team
-- have given themselves wiggle-room, too. Samantha Power, Obama's former adviser, says Obama's pullback plan is "a best-case scenario."

"He will, of course, not rely on some plan that he’s crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. Senator. He will rely upon a plan – an operational plan – that he pulls together in consultation with people who are on the ground to whom he doesn’t have daily access now, as a result of not being the president. So to think – it would be the height of ideology to sort of say, 'Well, I said it, therefore I’m going to impose it on whatever reality greets me.'"

And, of course, the two candidates are coming from entirely different places. McCain thinks the current counterinsurgency efforts in Iraq are going well. Given enough time, they can win the war -- and the troops can come home. Obama sees Iraq as a drain on the larger war against Al Qaeda, centered in Afghanistan. That's priority number one, and he wants to bring troops home to concentrate on it.

But despite the different starting points, there's a common bottom line: There are still going to be many thousands of troops in Iraq by
2013, no matter which one of these guys is president. (And we'll still have Afghanistan -- and lots of other places, too.)

For a long while, now, Obama has been pretty consistent in his hope that that number of personnel is as small as possible. McCain, the leading advocate of troop increases, now publicly shares that hope. The cynical ex-pol in me says the new words are a way for McCain to muddy the waters on the Iraq issue -- an escape to the "100 years" bind McCain has put himself in. McCain needed to show that he didn't want war forever (which, of course, he never said he did). Now the Republican has got a way. And it makes him sound, at least, a lot like his Democratic rival.

UPDATE: Joe Klein is not amused.

*And the tooth fairy will spread giggle-juice throughout the land, and the Mets will win the World Series and I will lose 20 pounds while continuing to consume vast quantities of Chinese and Italian food. Let's leave aside the transparent political crassness of this--actually, let's not. Clearly, McCain is trying to walk away from his support for a permanent (100 year) military presence. Indeed, the Senator's new dovery is undermined by the parameters for "victory" that he sets. As I've argued in the past, it is not wise to lay out timetables and end dates. The pace of withdrawal should be left to the commanders in the field, but it's the job of the President to set broad strategic goals. Some of McCain's goals are reasonable. We should be able to defeat the remnants of Al Qaeda in Iraq that are currently hunkered down in Mosul. But others are fanciful, at best. Militias disbanded? The notion of trying to disband the Mahdi Army, which has stood down -- for the time being--in Basra and is continuing to fight in Sadr City -- remains a fool's errand. And would McCain disband the Kurdish pesh merga? I don't think so. (In fact, he steadfastly refuses to notice that much of the backbone for the Iraqi Army is provided by the Badr Corps, yet another militia.) *