Bush Vows United States Will Defeat Terrorists in Iraq

President rules out setting deadline, says number of troops now sufficient

President Bush vowed that the United States will not flinch from fighting terrorism in Iraq or from seeing that democracy, prosperity and hope are spread throughout the Middle East.
In a speech June 28, Bush said that the sacrifice that the United States is making to bring democracy to Iraq is worthwhile because success in Iraq is vital to U.S. security and to the global cause of freedom.

The terrorists, both Iraqi and foreign, "know that as freedom takes root in Iraq, it will inspire millions across the Middle East to claim their liberty as well. And when the Middle East grows in democracy, prosperity, and hope, the terrorists will lose their sponsors, lose their recruits, and lose their hopes for turning that region into a base for attacks on America and our allies around the world," Bush said.

The president said the terrorists, despite their "savage acts of violence," are not achieving their strategic goals. He said the only way that the enemies of the United States can succeed is if the United States forgets the lessons of September 11, 2001 – something he vowed would not happen while he is president.

Bush noted that since sovereignty was restored to Iraq one year ago, Iraqis have held elections for a transitional government, are drafting a constitution, and are planning more elections for the end of the 2005. He noted that progress is being made in improving the educational and health systems and in rebuilding the infrastructure. More than 30 nations have troops in Iraq and many others are contributing nonmilitary assistance, Bush said.

"Thus far, some 40 countries and three international organizations have pledged about 34 billion dollars in assistance for Iraqi reconstruction," Bush said. "And next month, donor countries will meet in Jordan to support Iraqi reconstruction."

Regarding the question of setting a deadline for withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq, Bush said such an action would be a "serious mistake" in that it would send the wrong message to the Iraqi people, U.S. troops and the terrorists.

He also said that the United States does not need to send more troops to Iraq at this time.

"Sending more Americans would undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead in this fight. And sending more Americans would suggest that we intend to stay forever – when we are in fact working for the day when Iraq can defend itself and we can leave," he said.

In order to bolster the Iraqi security forces, Bush said the United States is taking three steps:

  • Partnering Coalition units with Iraqi units to show Iraqis "how the most professional armed forces in the world operate in combat;"
  • Embedding Coalition transition teams inside Iraqi units to provide "battlefield advice and assistance to Iraqi forces during combat operations;" and
  • Working with Iraq's Defense and Interior Ministries to improve their capabilities to coordinate anti-terrorist operations.
  • Bush said that on the political front, Iraq's constitutional committee plans to include more Sunni Arabs, and many Sunnis who opposed the elections in January are now participating in the political process.
"[A]s Iraqis see that their military can protect them, more will step forward with vital intelligence to help defeat the enemies of a free Iraq. The combination of political and military reform will lay a solid foundation for a free and stable Iraq," Bush said.

The transcript of Bush's speech

Popular posts from this blog

Netherlands and Canada's ICJ Torture Case Against Syria: A New Era of International Indictment of Sovereign Governments' National Crimes

Image
Netherlands' torture and other ill-treatment case against Syria at the International Court of Justice opens a new chapter in the international order and practice. Although our previous experience with the international order and the international institutions, especially in the Syrian crisis, lets almost no room for any expectations for this case to end torture in Syria or to achieve any difference in the course of action of the Syrian regime, it definitely can lay the foundation for this end by the international documentation, indictment and recognition of these domestic crimes.   In general, this unprecedented ICJ case has a particular international importance as It has a real chance to prompt a beginning of some international system development in terms of the international responsibility and role concerning ill-governance, which is generally fenced by the norm of sovereignty, especially in terms of systematic practice of torture and other kindes of ill-treatment by ...
Read more

The French Arrest Warrants for Chemical Weapons Attacks in Syria: A Precedent with Key Questions

Image
In an unprecedented development, the French judiciary has issued an international arrest warrants for the chemical weapons attacks performed by the Syrian government (regime) against civilians during the Syria war. The warrants target three top Syrian officials including the Syrian president.  Here is all you need to know about the first international (non-ICC) arrest warrant of a sitting head of another state for a grave crime against humanity and/or war crime by the Syrian Center for Media and Freedom of Expression (SCM) .  This international precedent is stating that no sovereign impunity for grave crimes against humanity, as clearly indicated by the issuing judiciary, prompts two questions. First, would it be a followed precedent marking a change in the int practice? And the second question, how the following practice will define the initiating grave crimes?  One explanatory enquiry should follow here is about whether the western powers that practically i...
Read more

Israel's Strategy in Syria: From Enabling Iran to Strategic Loss

Image
Seven months ago, I wrote about the failure of the Israeli policy in Syria, which poses Israel as a main regional loser in the aftermath of the war in Syria. This article has been followed by other articles describing the following changing balance in the Middle East between Israel and Iran to the benefit of Iran and the role of Israeli policies and its traditional strategy and means toward its regional strategic loss. Meanwhile, the Israeli government and intelligence establishment were in quite different place claiming even achievements in Syria as regards Iran's entrenchment there. The academia and research institutions were in-between. Recently, it came to my attention this article by Ehud Yaari, which is the ever best Israeli analysis I have read in months. Finally, there is some scholar in Israel has the realistic and true assessment of the situation in Syria and the Israeli policy there along with the strategic conclusion. This is definitely a useful work, as th...
Read more