Reid's prudent clarification

By Michael J.W. Stickings

A couple of days ago, I discussed incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's risky strategy of supporting a temporary troop increase in Iraq in return for the withdrawal the bulk of U.S. forces by 2008 -- that is, of supporting Bush in return for reciprocal support thereafter.

I didn't buy it. Bush has done nothing to earn our trust. Why support him now on something as ludicrously stupid as a troop increase?

Well, Reid has issued a clarification of his position at The Huffington Post, and his clarified position does not include support for a troop increase: "Frankly, I don't believe that more troops is the answer for Iraq. It's a civil war and America should not be policing a Sunni-Shia conflict. In addition, we don't have the additional forces to put in there. We obviously want to support what commanders in the field say they need, but apparently even the Joint Chiefs do not support increased combat forces for Baghdad."

And Reid is clearer than ever on what needs to happen now:

1. I believe we should start redeploying troops in 4 to 6 months (The Levin-Reed Plan) and complete the withdrawal of combat forces by the first quarter of 2008. (As laid out by the Iraq Study Group)

2. The President must understand that there can only be a political solution in Iraq, and he must end our nation's open-ended military commitment to that country.

3. These priorities need to be coupled with a renewed diplomatic effort and regional strategy.

Reid needs to bring this sort of clarity to the Senate. And Democrats shouldn't think that they'll ever reach a suitable compromise with Bush. They won't. Which is why clarity must be coupled with conviction.