MONDAY marked the third anniversary of the United States invasion of Iraq. The event gives the United States an occasion to reflect on the progress made so far. Unfortunately, not much can be said for the current situation, in which the central question is not "Is the mission accomplished?" but "Is this civil war?"
With around 50 Iraqis dying each day, the outlook is grim, to be sure, but all hope is not lost if the focus of U.S. policy changes drastically. The Bush administration must learn that military actions alone will not eliminate the insurgency and must switch to a more diplomacy-oriented approach.
The administration, predictably, seems to be the only hopeful voice in the debate over Iraq's current state. On Tuesday, President Bush said he would have pulled American troops out if he did not think the United States could succeed. While Bush and Cheney's claims that Iraq is making progress are either deliberate lies or wishful thinking, the President was right in asserting the possibility of success in Iraq.
Moreover, Bush emphasized the United States's obligation to stay in Iraq until a democratic Iraqi government is established. Again, Bush is right. While invading Iraq may or may not have been a good decision, leaving now would be even worse.
Security is a necessary element for establishing a viable democracy. However, it is difficult to imagine the insurgency in Iraq coming to a stop due only to military pressures from the United States. As intelligence officer Capt. Phillip Mann said in this month's Atlantic, "It's a matter of suppression. You [use combat operations] until you find