The chaotic reality Bush faces in Iraq
WASHINGTON
WITH INADEQUATE notice, the absurd linkage invented by President Bush to join "war in Iraq" with "war on terror" has fractured, raising the question not only whether anyone in his administration can explain what is going on but also whether anyone can explain what the United States is doing in Iraq.
The siege of Najaf and its sacred Shi'ite sites is hardly a military challenge. The Army and Marine units there can obviously crush all opposition and occupy the city whenever commanders choose. Instead, the siege is a political challenge that in the short run greatly increases the risk of more US combat deaths as commanders try to discern which masters they are serving, even as it calls into question the purpose of what remains a de facto occupation that is open-ended in terms of cost and duration.
This is a situation that the presidential campaign cannot illuminate or clarify. Wisely, Senator John Kerry avoids political commentary on each day's events, but because the situation is unfolding with such chaos, his longer-range thoughts about a smaller American and a larger international presence have no clear relevance. Bush may think his daily assaults on Kerry's capacity to be president are relevant, but except for the small sliver of voters addicted to cable television or affected by TV ad attacks, his campaign is not registering strongly with the public.
Most Americans appear to be concerned about the situation, doubtful about the wisdom of throwing money and military force at what is a mess, and increasingly convinced that this adventure is not worth its growing cost. There might be a case to be made, but the Bush administration is failing to make it.
There was a period following the fall of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship more than 16 months ago when what was then called "resistance" was attributed to diehard supporters of the deposed ruler and the foreign fighters and terrorists pouring through Iraq's undefended borders. Resistance, however, became "insurgency" months ago, and on some days it appears that the US occupation has managed to unite Sunni and Shi'ite communities in opposition to the US presence.
Military operations against insurgents north and south of Baghdad have been stopped short of successful completion as hostile elements have taken virtual control of a broad swath of the country. The issue is no longer terrorism; it is Iraq's post-Saddam future. Worse, the unifying political movement in Iraq increasingly seems to be opposition to the US presence in support of an interim government of our creation. Since the spring, an incompetent US administration has managed to let the issue become "us" as opposed to "them" -- a force the administration seems incapable of defining, much less countering.
What happened over the weekend concerning the siege of Najaf and related struggles in other cities should serve as a reminder of just how ridiculous the situation has become. As in the spring, offensive operations against a private army in the control of a militant have started, stopped, started, and stopped again, while Americans have been getting killed under rules of engagement that prevent them from following their most basic imperative -- suppressing fire directed at them. Offensive operations have been halted at least twice while Americans were told that elements of the new Iraqi armed forces were on the way to finish the most sensitive part of the job, only to find out that no one was coming and that there were no orders to finish the job. Worse, this chaos has unfolded under circumstances in which it has appeared that the interim government of the US-installed prime minister, Ayad Allawi, was making decisions about the deployment and use of American soldiers, which is the last thing you would expect a right-wing US administration to tolerate. It is bad enough to have to pretend that Allawi's government is truly sovereign, but if this is how the relationship is supposed to work, it is already a failure.
Sports allusions are always dangerous, but the ease with which the world can enjoy the success of the Iraqi soccer team in the Olympics is a revealing contrast to the reaction to the mess on the ground in Iraq.
President Bush's reelection is in doubt almost on the eve of his renomination, not yet because of Kerry but because of Bush's policies in the two most important areas of all -- the economy and national security. As long as events in the real world appear to be spiraling beyond his control, the urge to seek a fresh start is going to be strong.
The United States invaded Iraq to erase a threat that was misrepresented, and now the only people who want us to remain there, contrary to the misrepresentations of Bush and Dick Cheney, are the political "leaders" the United States forcibly installed.
Thomas Oliphant's e-mail address is oliphant@globe.com. 
