Thomas P.M. Barnett :: Weblog

The Surge made this possible.

Do we still believe that the best true sign of success re: COIN and the surge will be when a petrochemical sharing agreement is reached -- and that all else is very preliminary and tentative -- until this is achieved?

Unfortunately, some are seeing this as failure, saying this makes the "the case for the Iraq War as a neo-colonial exercise an easier one to defend."
(http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/blog/blog.aspx?id=2317)

Of course, they cite Andrew Sullivan for support, never a good sign.

I guess single narratives beat thinking, that's why I left academia!

Bill C.,

point well taken and i think i'll jump up and answer your rhetorical question and say yes because jobs is the exit strategy. there are other significant signs though as well including Sistani's obstinacy vis a vis iran; the math remains terrible but american casualties are way down; basra, especially just after the uk bailed, was nightmarish but has vastly improved; maliki's a much more viable force than sadr; al qaeda's almost universally hated and nearly a nonentity at this point;
kurdistan leads and the un's 'a' team's in kirkuk; the revolution of military practices proceeds apace; powell doctrine and vietnam syndrome vanquished; multitude of nation-states contribute to reconstruction; brooks' point today: iraqis now doing a lot of heavy lifting; strikes on iran out of the question w/iraq freshly stitched:
don't undo hard-fought gains; sunnis come to the table, it's now in their interest because of the surge and an actual game plan.

obama's best line to date: we must be as careful getting out as we were careless going in. he's no dummy--underestimate this man at
your own peril. he recognizes the momentum and the sudden advantages. can/will these gains be solidified in the coming
months? can a regional security alliance emerge? why couldn't
we have started w/gates as secdef?