By Brian Bohl

Bring the troops home from Iraq immediately.

That’s the strategy nearly 40 percent of the world said they would favor, according to a BBC poll released last week. Just one-in-four suggested that the US-led forces should stay until the country was stable and relatively safe from the widespread sectarian violence currently engulfing the region.

Twenty-two countries were represented in the survey, which came on the heels of President George W. Bush’s visit to the Al Asad Air Base in Iraq. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Stephen Hadley, the national security adviser, joined the president on his third trip to the war-ravaged country. During the stopover, the White House tried to coax support for the war strategy before this month’s congressional hearings.

While the troops responded to the president’s remarks with a rousing ovation, the reaction by the rest of the world-and domestically-continues to be negative. Only three countries (Kenya, the Philippines and India) claimed a majority of residents who said they were against a full withdrawal of troops by next year.

The Bush administration can shrug off the ardent opposition as nothing more than the preference of detached non-citizens. But assuaging similar concerns to the American public is proving more difficult. Gen. David Petraeus, the top American commander in Iraq and American ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker, said the U.S. will provide for a withdrawal this summer. Although it appears that the cutback is a concession to the domestic disenchantment with the war’s outlook, the plan still leaves 130,000 troops in Iraq with no more pullbacks scheduled in the near future.

The objectivity and political motives of the formal assessment were already being criticized even before a week before the report was submitted publicly, charges echoed after Gen. Petraeus’ report to a joint panel of the House Foreign Affairs and Armed Services Committees.

“By carefully manipulating the statistics, the Bush-Petraeus report will try to persuade us that violence in Iraq is decreasing and thus the surge is working,” said Illinois Sen. Richard Durbin, who holds the title of No. 2 Democrat in the Senate. “Even if the figures were right, the conclusion is wrong.”

Rhetoric from the Democrats also was strong against the president’s trip to Iraq. Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the Senate majority leader, dismissed the excursion as a public relations move to bolster dwindling support in a divided Congress and a divided country.

General Petraeus’ responsibilities now includes the role of salesman as he tries to reassure the voting public, and skeptical lawmakers, that last year’s troop surge provided a spark instead of causing a power shortage. Adding extra troops helped quell violence in certain areas, mostly in al-Anbar province, but not as much in Baghdad.

In a sign that the White House is operating from a weakened position, Gen. Petraeus was considering accepting a pullback of roughly 4,000 troops by January. The question remained if that small cut would be a precursor to an eventual full withdrawal, or just a token gesture designed to alleviate pressure from Democrats and disenfranchised Republicans in both congressional chambers.

After this week’s testimony, it appears that military brass is not close to endorsing a complete exit in Iraq. The 30,000 soldiers that would come home would simply reduce the force levels near the pre-surge number, hardly an endorsement or show of confidence that Iraq is close to complete sovereignty.

Members of the Joint Chiefs and Central Command are encountering the difficult task of determining appropriate troop levels to ensure Iraq’s security while also providing hope that the prolonged war isn’t overtaxing the troops or eroding all public support.

Even adjusted for inflation, the military received more money than any other armed forces in the history of the world. That bloated budget, which entails expenses for escalating hardware and supply costs but not substantial pay hikes for soldiers, means another 5-10 year large-scale Middle East presence could pile on expenses reaching into the trillions of dollars with no guarantee of success.

Last week’s al-Qaeda-led violence in northwestern Iraq underscored the precious position of long-term planning. Gen Petraeus can talk about downsizing in the morning and witness an attack like the one in the Yazidi community and wonder if taking away resources is the appropriate call.

The only problem is that there may never be an appropriate time for a small reduction or full-scale withdrawal. Three-fourths of the world said they favor some type of pullback. In the United States, one-fourth of people surveyed were in favor of leaving immediately. The people are letting their voices be heard. Public officials are growing increasingly skeptical. In the future, it’s possible that no amount of public appearances from President Bush will be enough to persuade the public to continue exercising patience.

Brian Bohl is a senior print journalism student. You may e-mail him at [email protected].

(Andres Soto)

Brian Bohl