Brigadier General (ret) Kevin Ryan, Belfer Center senior fellow, discusses counterinsurgency strategies in Iraq with Colonel John Tien, an Army War College and National Security fellow at the Kennedy School this year.
Belfer Center

"Iraq: Stay or Go? Center Analysts Explore the Options"

Newsletter Article, Belfer Center Newsletter, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs

Summer 2008

The President-elect has brought you on as National Security Advisor based on your analytical capability to think clearly about Iraq and the region. He/she has asked for your comprehensive analysis of the best way forward in Iraq. You are to draft a memo outlining three strategic options. One option should provide the newly-elected president an opportunity to deliver on his/her political promise to withdraw troops as rapidly as possible. The others should focus on how best to defend and advance American vital national interests within Iraq and across the region, even if that requires some adjustment of what was said in the campaign.

Graham Allison, director of the Belfer Center, and Meghan O'Sullivan, Center senior fellow and former deputy national security advisor for Iraq and Afghanistan, assigned this task to students in their "Central Challenges of American Foreign Policy" class. Interestingly, Allison notes, 90 percent of the students were for rapid withdrawal from Iraq when they began, but by the time they wrote their memos, "more than half were for leaving 75,000 plus troops there for long time."

Like the students, Allison and others at the Center have a range of views on the Iraq war and the best way forward. As the nation noted the fifth anniversary of the war in March, several experts offered their thoughts. Commentary is posted in full at http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/18169/.

Graham Allison

"Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) has called the Iraq War, ‘the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since Vietnam.' I agree. The fifth anniversary of this unnecessary ‘war of choice' should serve as a reminder that however expensive the direct costs in blood and treasure, the opportunity costs are even more significant. At a point where the U.S. had successfully toppled the Taliban and had Al-Qaeda on the ropes, the president took our eyes off the prize. As a consequence, Al-Qaeda has re-acquired its sanctuaries and was able to regenerate ‘key capabilities it would need to launch an attack on U.S. soil.'"

Eric Rosenbach (Executive Director for Research, Belfer Center)

"The reality of contemporary Iraq is that we are far from achieving the goal of a stable, independent and democratic country.... Upon taking office in January 2009, the next president will need to rationally and thoughtfully consider America's national interests in a future Iraq.... Military advisors will likely recommend that the president maintain enough troops in Iraq to hold hard-won gains.... This will likely lead the next president, whether Republican or Democrat, to seriously consider a longer-term commitment to Iraq."

Stephen Walt (Professor of International Affairs; Belfer Center Board of Directors)

"The war has done enormous damage to U.S. interests in the Middle East. The invasion destabilized the region and enhanced Iran's influence and strategic position. It also contributed to the unprecedented rise in oil prices, discredited democracy, and further tarnished America's image in the Arab and Islamic world.... Civil war may occur after we withdraw, but that danger exists whenever we leave.... For the next president, continuing the occupation means taking ownership of Bush's blunder. If he or she does this, the Iraq quagmire will dominate their presidency and make it harder to focus on other looming challenges, while the costs continue to mount. By getting out quickly, the next president can restore America's freedom of action and begin to rebuild our damaged international position."

Meghan O'Sullivan

"At the end of 2006, most Americans were talking about how to manage a defeat in Iraq.... Today, we have the right strategy in place, and it is making a difference on the ground.... It is too early to claim success and we know how fragile progress in Iraq can be.... When our commitment to Iraq is strong, we can help create the environment in which Iraqi leaders make decisions consistent with a stable, united Iraq. If our commitment comes into question, it will become harder for Iraqis to put aside their sectarian and ethnic affiliations and make decisions in the interest of Iraq as a whole."

Kevin Ryan (Belfer Center Senior Fellow; Brigadier General ret.)

"Time may turn out to be our greatest ally in Iraq. If we can keep violence to a tolerable level and keep reconciliation moving forward then, given enough time, we can be hopeful about a unified and stable Iraq. American military and diplomatic presence in Iraq should be designed to leverage this growing factor of time. Our force levels should be lowered so they can be sustainable over time. Our reconstruction investments should be increased so they can provide substantial economic assistance for the long haul."

For more information about this publication please contact the Belfer Center Communications Office at 617-495-9858.

For Academic Citation:
Communications Office. "Iraq: Stay or Go? Center Analysts Explore the Options." Cambridge, Mass.: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Belfer Center Newsletter (Summer 2008).