As President Bush insists for additional troops in Iraq to quell the sectarian violence in Baghdad, I almost freak out in my room while listening to his State of the Union Address.  While the American public is demanding a “new course” in Iraq, this administration holds on to the idea of “staying the course.” The message of the November 2006 election is “clear and distinct”, i.e., the American people do not want a “rubber stamp” Congress. They want a Democratic House and Senate who can say to the President  “enough is enough”.  The message resonates not only within the “walls of downtown Washington” but goes from coast to coast,  East to West and North to South.

The academic community and the philosophers of the great American universities find no logical and ethical justification for this war. The American Philosophical Association recently concluded its annual conference (held in Wardman Park Marriott in Washington, D.C. last December 27 - 30, 2006) with a resolution reiterating its opposition to the war in Iraq.

President Bush defies both public opinion and scholars. He thinks that increasing the troops in Iraq is a better strategy to attain his idealistic goal. With less than two years before he retires “en eternam”, I could not think of ways how to save his presidency and the legacy he will leave in the pages of American history.

My research concludes that the “Surge of Troops in Iraq” is not a good war strategy and is never an answer to the growing sectarian violence in Baghdad.  The Iraq war is not only costing hundred of billions of dollar but had claimed more than three thousand lives of our military. Another increase of troops does not guarantee a permanent stability within the area.  We do not need more troops in the streets of Baghdad but a new strategy that will maximize and utilize the existing military personnel already in the war zone. A radical change of direction in the way this war is conducted is necessary in winning the hearts of the Muslim world.  We cannot continue with Bush’s doctrine of aggressiveness because it is creating more resentment and hatred among the Arabs.  The key to success is succinctly spelled out in the Baker-Hamilton Commission, i.e., diplomacy.  The “Surge of Troops” is not necessary because:  First, the Iraqis will never take responsibility for their own security for as long  as they see of the growing number of American troops in Iraq streets (an opinion shared by the retired generals of the U.S. military).  An active involvement of the Iraqi people plays a significant role in a more stable and peaceful Iraq.  They have to be directly involved in the administration of their own government so that the war is not seen as an invasion of their oil but liberation from tyranny and slavery (if they were indeed slaves to the cruelty of Saddam).  Second,  the “Surge of Troops” (which is openly acknowledged by both the chiefs of the Marines and Army) will further stretched out the military which means inability to render their  military services effectively in the event they are needed again soon (I hope we are not going to war with Iran soon enough?).  Third, the “Surge” will only create a temporary “vacuum of peace” in Baghdad because the Sunni insurgents and Shiites militia will always be around and “hibernate their broken bones”.  These people will be more than patient enough to wait and wait until the American forces are out of Baghdad streets.  They will strike against each other when there is an opportunity.  This is a country with a long history of ethnic and tribal division. History will tell us that democracy (much more the American style) is never possible in the Arab world. Iraq needs a strong leader who can unite together the Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds. If the country cannot produce one for its people, neither America nor the United Nation can provide one.  Fourth, the Congressional Budget Office reported that Bush’s plan to deploy more than 20,000 combat troops would require additional support personnel of 15,000 or possibly 28,000 which means that the deployment will bring a total of 48,000 people.  The estimated cost for the first four months is between 9 billion dollars to 13 billion and can even reach 27 billion for the first year of operation. Congress should do something about the skyrocketing expenses of Iraq war and I hope that the Democrats would take a more radical approach rather than a non-binding resolution.

The “Surge of Troops” is not necessary and is a waste of taxpayers’ money. President Bush should listen to the wisdom of the Baker Commission if he wants to save his legacy. Two of them are immediate and should be adopted now rather than latter. First, shift U.S. troops from active combat role to advising Iraqi forces and second, urge more diplomatic initiatives to secure Iraq and the region involving Iran and Syria.  What the Bush administration needs is not a strong military but three things: first, humility; second, humility; and third, humility (adopting the words of St. Augustine).