Bush Can't Be the President of Iraq and America

As President George W. Bush outlined his new plan to get us out of the quagmire in Iraq, it was evident that despite his assertions, the Iraqi people are not in control of their own destiny.

There have been repeated calls from Democrats and Republicans for the Iraqis to step to the plate and assume command of the nation. Yet our administration essentially asserts that they are not ready to do so, and require our assistance, namely in the area of security.

The civil war that has engulfed the nation has led to the deaths of a number of Iraqis, as well as U.S. soldiers. Bush hopes that the 21,500 troops he is adding to those already in the country will stabilize it and provide a solid backup to Iraqi troops.

But when it comes to Iraq, we are sort of like the big brother or sister who refuses to let our younger sibling learn from his or her own mistakes, preferring to do the work ourselves. As Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., has asserted, as long as we maintain such a large presence in the country, the Iraqis will have no reason to assume command of the decisions.

This was the biggest mistake we made at the outset of the war: demanding the United States control every aspect of Iraq, as opposed to letting leaders in the country take the lead. The worst thing in the eye of Iraqis — and frankly, Muslims worldwide who aren't happy with American domination — was seeing Ambassador L. Paul Bremer III serve as the administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority.

He essentially ruled the country and was the de facto president of Iraq.

And on Wednesday night, Bush further made it plain that he runs Iraq — not Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki.

In his speech, Bush announced that "to establish its authority, the Iraqi government plans to take responsibility for security in all of Iraq's provinces by November.

"To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country's economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis.

To show that it is committed to delivering a better life, the Iraqi government will spend $10 billion of its own money on reconstruction and infrastructure projects that will create new jobs.

"To empower local leaders, Iraqis plan to hold provincial elections later this year. And to allow more Iraqis to re-enter their nation's political life, the government will reform de-Baathification laws, and establish a fair process for considering amendments to Iraq's constitution."

How many Americans heard any of these plans from al-Maliki? Heck, how many Iraqis heard their own leader make such an announcement?

This is the kind of fundamental issue that doesn't serve our long-term interests. Finally, we hear a plan that calls for Iraqis to spend their money on the nation's infrastructure, and it comes from the U.S. president and not Iraq's leader.

Supporters of the war say we have to protect "American interests." But it's not in the best interest of Americans to continue to run the nation. We keep saying we don't want to do it, but our actions are speaking louder than our words.

Big brother, it's time to let go. What is more debilitating to a younger sibling: failing, or having to constantly have big bro or sis looking over your shoulder and telling you how to do this or that?

We can't continue to hold the Iraqis' hands. Frankly, whether we think we can stabilize the country or not, we are likely to see fierce fighting for control of the country. That's what opposing interests do. Remember, we had our own Civil War that was fought on the battlefield and not in the halls of Congress, editorial pages and radio talk shows.

Mr. President, it's time for Iraq to grow up, and not continue to be propped up by the United States.

Roland S. Martin is the author of "Listening to the Spirit Within: 50 Perspectives On Faith." Please visit his Web site at www.rolandsmartin.com. To find out more about Roland Martin and read his past columns, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2007 CREATORS SYNDICATE