For months now, John McCain has urged Barack Obama to visit Iraq. “It has been 873 days since Sen. Obama’s one and only visit to Iraq,” a McCain campaign statement said on May 30. “Before [he] decides to override the recommendations of our commanders in the field and surrender the fight, he should have the judgment to see for himself first-hand the conditions on the ground.”
Maybe McCain shouldn’t have been so emphatic. What if Obama went to Iraq, decided his position was the correct one, and then, in a major campaign coup, received what appeared to be the endorsement of the Iraqi prime minister? And — extra points — made himself look more statesmanlike in the process?
Obama arrived in Baghdad early this morning, and all that seems to have happened.
There’s no possibility that Obama will change his position in any substantive way. Under fire from the Democratic base for intimating that he might make a more gradual withdrawal from Iraq than previously promised, he reiterated his out-in-16-months position in a major speech before leaving on his fact-finding mission to Iraq. McCain complained that the timing smacked of bad faith. “Apparently, he’s confident enough that he won’t find any facts that might change his opinion or alter his strategy,” McCain said on Saturday. But Obama quieted the rumblings on his left.
Then, hours after McCain’s complaint, Obama appeared to win a trump-card endorsement of his proposal. In the days leading up to Obama’s visit, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was interviewed by the German magazine
Der Spiegel, and his words seemed to come straight from Obama’s talking points.
“Would you hazard a prediction as to when most of the US troops will finally leave Iraq?”
Der Spiegel asked.
“As soon as possible, as far as we’re concerned,” Maliki answered. “U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes.”
“Is this an endorsement for the US presidential election in November?” the magazine followed up. “Does Obama, who has no military background, ultimately have a better understanding of Iraq than war hero John McCain?”
“Those who operate on the premise of short time periods in Iraq today are being more realistic,” Maliki said. “Artificially prolonging the tenure of US troops in Iraq would cause problems. Of course, this is by no means an election endorsement. Who they choose as their president is the Americans’ business. But it’s the business of Iraqis to say what they want. And that’s where the people and the government are in general agreement: The tenure of the coalition troops in Iraq should be limited.”
CONTINUED 1 2 Next > 
