For Iraq’s top general to have said publicly that the pullout of U.S. troops by the end of next year is premature was a considerable folly.

Lt. Gen. Babaker Zebari went on to claim his troops might not be able to take control of the military situation for another decade. It is hard to imagine what the general thought he was going to achieve by this outburst, which surely cannot have been authorized by any government figure, if for no better reason than the deplorable fact that over five months after elections, Iraq still has no proper government.
It will be suspected, of course, that Washington may have been behind Zebari’s words, since they constitute an invitation for the U.S. to continue its occupation. However, there are powerful factors arguing against U.S. complicity. Barack Obama won the presidency with a clear promise to quit Iraq. The American message has been that the Iraqi police and armed forces have reached a level of competence and equipment where they can assume responsibility for security. Indeed in recent months, much has been made of the fact that very few U.S. troops have been out on the streets, leaving the job of dealing with the violence to the Iraqis. Only in the field of sophisticated signals intelligence is the U.S. likely to have any future role alongside the Iraqi military. That contribution probably need not involve the continued presence of U.S. boots on the ground.
Besides, if Washington’s assurances about the standards achieved by the Iraqi security forces really are nonsense, what does it say about similar protestations over the level of training and efficiency currently being claimed for the Afghan police and military?
Gen. Zebari’s words probably therefore need to be weighed against other factors. The dangerous lack of a coherent coalition government is itself contributing to rising instability. The almost half year that Iraqi politicians have wasted so scandalously must have engendered deep concern, not just among the higher echelons of command but through the entire rank and file of the security forces. They see themselves as responsible to the Iraqi people but they need orders, they need policy and they need political support. The politicians who should be providing these are failing in their own responsibilities to Iraqis. Most crucially they are undermining the authority and morale of the men charged with winning and maintaining the peace. The political stalemate is spreading a cancer of uncertainty that must inevitably be straining loyalties in the security forces. They are a mirror of society. As uncertainty continues, the risk of greater polarization of different communities increases. Inevitably, this must have an effect on those charged with protecting the country from a renewed campaign of terror. The American occupation must end as planned, because the presence of U.S. troops has been part of the problem. Equally, Iraqis cannot take back control of their country unless they recognize the paramount and urgent need for a stable coalition government. Their abject failure to put national interest before party interest is reprehensible and is sowing the lack of confidence that Zebari’s unfortunate statement demonstrates