IRAQ Postwar Plan

Updated: May 7, 2003

link_http://www.cfr.org/background/background_iraq_postwar.php

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Did the United States have a plan to govern postwar Iraq?

Yes and no. It had a structure - a new Pentagon office to organize a U.S. - led civilian administration for Iraq that by the war’s end had hired more than 200 staff. But the plan itself was left somewhat open-ended so it could adapt to unpredictable postwar conditions. “The plan was to have a bunch of smart people improvising furiously,” says Arthur C. Helton, the director of Peace and Conflict Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Who is in charge of postwar planning?

Officials at the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance (ORHA), the new Defense Department agency created to run postwar Iraq, developed general outlines for a postwar administration. On May 6, a new top administrator, former diplomat L. Paul Bremer III, was named to oversee ORHA and its director, retired Lieutenant General Jay M. Garner.

How has the plan worked in practice?

ORHA is still hiring U.S. personnel for key positions, such as temporary heads of many Iraqi ministries. Looting of government offices has prevented many Iraqis from going back to work. ORHA’s decision to rehire Baath Party members with ties to Saddam Hussein’s regime is proving controversial and has sparked protests. The process to select an interim Iraq authority has begun. Overall, however, the situation remains chaotic through much of the country. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has said that some disorder at this early stage is inevitable.

Was the United States prepared for the problems of postwar Iraq?

Some U.S. officials have admitted that the postwar situation is more unstable than they expected. Garner told the Washington Post May 4, “We didn’t anticipate the looting to occur to the degree it did [occur]. I personally anticipated a huge number of soldiers surrendering. I was going to hire 100,000 Iraqi soldiers to reconstruct Iraq. They either died or evaporated. The operation didn’t unfold as planned. We’re making readjustments.”

What explains the apparent lack of preparation?

Observers say that interagency battles in Washington, in particular between the State Department and Defense Department, slowed and muddied plans. Critics charge that the Defense Department, which became the lead U.S. agency for postwar Iraq in January 2003, relied on an excessively optimistic postwar scenario. Critics also say the Defense Department failed to make full use of planning efforts that had been underway at the State Department’s Future of Iraq project since March 2002.

What are the differences between State and Defense approaches to postwar Iraq?

One key difference is over which Iraqis should lead an interim government and how to choose them. Officials from the Defense Department reportedly favor moving quickly to an interim Iraqi authority that would give a critical role to Iraqi exiles who opposed Saddam Hussein’s regime. The Pentagon is said to back Ahmad Chalabi, the 58-year-old former banker and longtime exile who heads the Iraqi National Congress, as a possible future leader of Iraq. The State Department reportedly favors a more deliberate process that puts greater emphasis on the participation of resident Iraqis who suffered through Saddam’s rule.

Another difference: the State Department is more inclined to give the United Nations a role in planning for an Iraqi government; the Defense Department reportedly shuns U.N. involvement.

What is the significance of Bremer’s appointment as special presidential envoy?

A former State Department official and head of counterterrorism in the Reagan administration, Bremer will be the highest ranking civilian official in Iraq. His appointment will answer complaints raised by some nongovernmental organization and State Department officials, who had objected to military control of the U.S.-led postwar Iraqi government.

What were those objections?

Critics were unhappy that Garner, a retired military man himself, worked for General Tommy Franks, the commander of all U.S. forces in the region. Under Bremer, ORHA will bypass the military chain of command and report to President Bush through Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, according to Commander Chris Isleib, a spokesman for the Department of Defense.

Will Bremer’s appointment tilt policy toward the State Department approach?

Not necessarily. Bremer answers to Rumsfeld, and he was approved by the Department of Defense and reportedly has close ties with top Pentagon officials. State Department partisans point out, however, that Bremer is a former career Foreign Service Officer.

What was ORHA’s plan?

It called for a U.S.-led civilian administration to lead Iraq through the first few months after the conflict. In a March 11 press briefing, a senior ORHA official said that the team expected to call most Iraqis back to work shortly after taking charge and hoped to use the Iraqi Army to rebuild the country. Before the war started, ORHA hired a number of expatriate Iraqis to serve as advisers to Americans who were slated to head up most of the Iraqi ministries immediately following the war. Teams of officials from the Treasury Department, State Department, and others were asked to come up with potential plans for postwar Iraq, which could be adapted to suit on-the-ground conditions.

Have the looting and lawlessness dissipated?

To a degree. But observers on the ground say there is not enough coalition manpower to enforce order - 12,000 U.S. troops are assigned to watch over Baghdad’s 5 million residents - and a variety of local groups are rising up to fill the power vacuum. The Wall Street Journal summed up the situation on the ground in Iraq on May 3 as follows: “In the three weeks since U.S. forces seized control of Iraq’s key cities, the grass-roots power seizure has been profound. In towns and cities across this California-size country, clerics and sheiks have proclaimed themselves mayors and councilmen. Others have taken control of schools, clinics and government offices. Religious leaders have started to adjudicate disputes and sentence offenders. Some have formed armed militias.”

Is the Garner team sufficiently equipped?

There have been numerous press reports that Garner’s team is ill-equipped and isolated in its headquarters, the 258-room Republican Palace on the banks of the Tigris River. It also lacks the personnel to do much implementation itself ― in concept, it is intended as a coordination agency to direct the efforts of Iraqi workers and other players on the ground.

What’s the timetable for an Iraqi interim administration?

In light of the difficulties of forming a U.S.-led postwar administration, the timetable appears to have been accelerated. Garner announced May 4 that the nucleus of an interim authority would be formed by mid-May, with major Iraqi opposition leaders at its center. The New York Times reported that opposition leaders have been dispatched throughout the country to designate some 350 delegates for a major conference in Baghdad this month that will name an interim executive council or prime minister. Garner has said he expects the interim authority to be led by eight or nine Iraqis, at least five of whom will be exiles.

Are other countries helping to fill the power vacuum?

Only those invited by the United States. It has reportedly not discussed participation with France, Germany, or Russia ― steadfast opponents of the war. A current Pentagon security plan would split Iraq into three command areas, with U.S. forces controlling the central region, Poland commanding the northern region, and Great Britain commanding the south. Poland and Great Britain, along with Australia, contributed combat troops to the war.

A total of some 16 nations, including Italy, Spain, Philippines, Qatar, South Korea, and Albania, are considering contributing security forces to postwar Iraq, Geoffrey Hoon, the British defense minister, said May 2. Bush administration officials have repeatedly said they do not see a security role for the United Nations at this time.

Does this represent a shift in U.S. policy?

Yes. In recent nation-building efforts ― Bosnia, Kosovo, East Timor, and Afghanistan ― the United Nations played a role. In Kosovo, NATO organized security and the French and Germans were major participants in the postwar force. Some scholars say Iraq postwar security arrangements represent a fundamental shift in Washington away from the United Nations and NATO and toward a system of shifting alliances, in which the United States works with ad hoc “coalitions of the willing” to deal with its security interests around the globe.

How many U.S. soldiers are in Iraq now?

About 130,000 coalition troops are currently stationed in Iraq, including about 90,000 from the United States. According to The New York Times, the Defense Department would like to reduce its total forces in Iraq to some 30,000 by the fall and include other nations in its postwar security plan. Rumsfeld said May 2 that he still does not know how many U.S. forces will be required for postwar Iraq.