Best Defense

Thomas E. Ricks' daily take on national security.

Dubik: Where the Obama Administration dropped the ball, badly, on Iraq policy

“Once the violence and the insurgency were reduced, the nonmilitary elements of the Surge became even more important. Unfortunately, U.S. policy did not see it that way.”

U.S. Vice President Joe Biden speaks to Gen. Ray Odierno (C) and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Christopher Hill (L) at the American Embassy in Baghdad, on July 3, 2010. AFP PHOTO / ALI AL-SAADI (Photo credit should read ALI AL-SAADI/AFP/Getty Images)
U.S. Vice President Joe Biden speaks to Gen. Ray Odierno (C) and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Christopher Hill (L) at the American Embassy in Baghdad, on July 3, 2010. AFP PHOTO / ALI AL-SAADI (Photo credit should read ALI AL-SAADI/AFP/Getty Images)
U.S. Vice President Joe Biden speaks to Gen. Ray Odierno (C) and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Christopher Hill (L) at the American Embassy in Baghdad, on July 3, 2010. AFP PHOTO / ALI AL-SAADI (Photo credit should read ALI AL-SAADI/AFP/Getty Images)

“Once the violence and the insurgency were reduced, the nonmilitary elements of the Surge became even more important. Unfortunately, U.S. policy did not see it that way.”

“Once the violence and the insurgency were reduced, the nonmilitary elements of the Surge became even more important. Unfortunately, U.S. policy did not see it that way.”

So writes retired Army Lt. Gen. James Dubik in the December issue of ARMY magazine.

I think he is right. Blame for this must be assigned to President Obama, Vice President Biden, and Christopher Hill, the fork-tongued former U.S. ambassador to Iraq. (Side note: There’s an interesting split between many political reporters, who think Biden is the cat’s pajamas, and some national security reporters, who believe he’s a long-winded mediocrity.)

An interesting corollary of Dubik’s point is that he says leaving 10,000 troops in Iraq was not the answer, or at least not the entire one. Some military presence may have been necessary, he says, but it was not sufficient — what was needed was political action.

Photo credit: AFP/Getty Images

Thomas E. Ricks covered the U.S. military from 1991 to 2008 for the Wall Street Journal and then the Washington Post. He can be reached at ricksblogcomment@gmail.com. Twitter: @tomricks1

More from Foreign Policy

Newspapers in Tehran feature on their front page news about the China-brokered deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia to restore ties, signed in Beijing the previous day, on March, 11 2023.
Newspapers in Tehran feature on their front page news about the China-brokered deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia to restore ties, signed in Beijing the previous day, on March, 11 2023.

Saudi-Iranian Détente Is a Wake-Up Call for America

The peace plan is a big deal—and it’s no accident that China brokered it.

Austin and Gallant stand at podiums side by side next to each others' national flags.
Austin and Gallant stand at podiums side by side next to each others' national flags.

The U.S.-Israel Relationship No Longer Makes Sense

If Israel and its supporters want the country to continue receiving U.S. largesse, they will need to come up with a new narrative.

Russian President Vladimir Putin lays flowers at the Moscow Kremlin Wall in the Alexander Garden during an event marking Defender of the Fatherland Day in Moscow.
Russian President Vladimir Putin lays flowers at the Moscow Kremlin Wall in the Alexander Garden during an event marking Defender of the Fatherland Day in Moscow.

Putin Is Trapped in the Sunk-Cost Fallacy of War

Moscow is grasping for meaning in a meaningless invasion.

An Iranian man holds a newspaper reporting the China-brokered deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia to restore ties, in Tehran on March 11.
An Iranian man holds a newspaper reporting the China-brokered deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia to restore ties, in Tehran on March 11.

How China’s Saudi-Iran Deal Can Serve U.S. Interests

And why there’s less to Beijing’s diplomatic breakthrough than meets the eye.