Really, The Iraqis Love Us Now

Welcome to the new narrative. Until the next round of Iraqi public opinion surveys appear, we’re going to be hearing a lot of evidence-free assertions about how the people whose country we continue to occupy have genuinely changed their minds about the occupation. This is an understandable contortion; having set forth anecdotal claims about the success of The Surge, and having made the predictable arguments about the need to salvage America’s “reputation” by seeing “the mission” through to its murky end, supporters of the war are now getting around to insisting that the current strategy is actually consonant with the wishes of ordinary Iraqis.

Here’s Cap’n Crunch, for instance:

We moved from being hated occupiers to protectors when we finally started doing something to improve the situation on the ground. The Iraqis had seen us as arbitrary authority unwilling to risk anything to save them from both themselves and the terrorists. The new strategy of aggressive tactics and engagement with the enemy has impressed them and won the allegiance of ordinary Iraqis — and has taken the pressures off that otherwise could have been channeled into sectarian conflict.

And here’s the long-winded pseudo-intellectual Jeff Goldstein, last seen revealing his 1970s lit-crit credentials by taking semiotics seriously:

[I]t turns out that the Iraqis were waiting to make sure of our commitment, and now — convinced that their “imperialist occupiers” have their interests at heart — they are beginning not only to greet us as liberators, but are working along side us to ensure that the liberation takes.

Not that Goldstein, et. al., believe Iraqi popular attitudes actually matter in this whole debate. Otherwise, they’d be insisting that the Bush administration’s demands for a privatized oil industry — one of the “benchmarks” most vigorously opposed by Iraqis themselves — be scuttled. But no matter. As of one year ago, most everyone in Iraq wanted us the fuck out of their country:

A large majority of Iraqis—71%—say they would like the Iraqi government to ask for U.S.-led forces to be withdrawn from Iraq within a year or less. Given four options, 37 percent take the position that they would like U.S.-led forces withdrawn “within six months,” while another 34 percent opt for “gradually withdraw[ing] U.S.-led forces according to a one-year timeline.” Twenty percent favor a two-year timeline and just 9 percent favor “only reduc[ing] U.S.-led forces as the security situation improves in Iraq.”

. . . As compared to January 2006, there has been, overall, a growing sense of urgency for withdrawal of U.S.-led forces. In January, respondents were only given three options—six months, two years, and an open-ended commitment. In September, the one-year option was added, since it had been nearly a year since the last time they were asked. While in January 70 percent favored withdrawal within two years (35% six months, 35% two years), now— approximately a year later—71 percent favor withdrawal within a year (37% six months, 34% one year). Support for an open-ended commitment has dropped from 29 percent to 9 percent.

I suppose the easy lesson here is that “the Iraqis” matter so long as their beliefs can be sculpted to resemble the sustained fantasies of American war supporters. And now that “Eventheliberalwarcritics” O’Pollahan have given them renewed hope, look for “the Iraqi people” to start sounding remarkably like serious fellows from the Brookings Institute.