Obama's brave (new?) world

[Heimdallr]

At first glance, Democratic Senator Barack Obama's "new overarching strategy" for Iraq and Afghanistan is streets ahead of the approach proposed by his US presidential rival, Republican Senator John McCain. But from the planned withdrawal of troops from Iraq to dealing with the Taliban, Obama's vision, when it comes to implementation, will likely founder on the harsh realities that have so frustrated the George W Bush administration.

To say that Obama's plan - sketched earlier in an op-ed piece for The New York Times - is more realistic, thoughtful and sensible than that of rival Republican Senator John McCain's "road to victory" in Iraq would be an understatement.

Does Obama's proposed redeployment in Iraq automatically translate into no US troops in Mesopotamia by the summer of 2010?

No. It translates into "a residual force to perform specific missions in Iraq: targeting any remnants of al-Qaeda; protecting our service members and diplomats; and training and supporting Iraq's security forces, so long as the Iraqis make political progress."

So Obama's "broader strategic goals" include an unspecified "residual force" in Iraq and more combat brigades in Afghanistan. Is this so radically different from McCain?

The current status quo in Iraq - and with at least 30,000 "residual" US troops. Withdrawal it isn't. Is this "change we can believe in", part of a new "overarching strategy" - or is this the same status quo as defined by half a century of continuous, many would say imperial, US foreign interference?

AsiaTimes.com >>> Obamas brave (new?) world