Cup - Half Full

Parsing the recent meeting between Bush and Brown can be a difficult execise. I watched Alastair Campbell (reknowned Spinmeister) on PBS and he was of the opinion that it was business as usual and that Brown and Blair were cut from the same cloth, two peas in a pod, co-joined political partners, nothing to see here, move along. I would expect that from Mr. Campbell, he has a vested interest in not sullying the, or rather, rehabilitating the Blair legacy as he was so closely associated with the rise and ultimate fall. Where the US commentator saw possible division and divergence Campbell saw only agreement and parallel goals. Now the dust has settled somewhat and the narrative digested we begin to see the first signs of policy manouvering by Brown and perhaps, a growing realization from the administration that they will, shortly, be on their own.

And why is that? Maybe it is because that whenever this administration attempts to spin the news out of Iraq, they get caught in a tragic, preposterous lie.

On July 26, Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the second-ranking American commander in Iraq, said that the lower death toll was a “positive sign” but that it was too early to say whether the reduction was a “true trend.”
New York Times

2007 saw the deadliest July for US troops since the Iraq War began. It also saw a 23% rise in Iraqi deaths over June. July is like a blast furnace in Iraq, with temperatures approaching 120 degrees F. in the shade. Guerrillas typically lie low in this unfavorable environment, compared to other seasons, and so the casualty rates go down. Instead, this year the killing season has gone on as if it were spring.

Number of US troops killed in Iraq, July, 2007: 74
The Truth - Courtesy of Juan Cole (Read him every day, gentle reader)

But it is not just the military situation that continues to wear a grim face. The political situation is out of hand. Before the Iraqi parliament recessed, the turmoil continued.

Al Maliki's government is in chaos, the Kurds are threatening civil war against the Sunni's, the Shi'a militia's are as strong as ever and appear to control large areas of Iraq including most of Southern Iraq where the British are stationed which probably accounts for the relative stability of that region. The British have pretty much ceded security to the Badr Corps and the Mahdi Army, therefore making their presence irrelevant. It will be interesting to see what happens in Basra and it's environs once the British hand over control to the 'Iraqi Army.'

The escallation was supposed to allow the Iraqi government time to regroup under a less perilous security situation. The violence would subside in Baghdad and unity and reconciliation would break out all over. Early indicators (after six months of this continued stupidity) would suggest that the 'surge' has succeeded, moderately, in providing the Republican members of Congress breathing room, as for Iraq - not so much.