Yesterday, the Pentagon released its Quarterly Report to Congress on Iraq. “While security has improved dramatically, the fundamental character of the conflict in Iraq remains unchanged — a communal struggle for power and resources,” the report said.

Buried on page 28 of the report, the Pentagon notes, “Iraqis’ perception of the security situation is a mixed bag.” According to research from August 2008, “73% of Iraqis described the security situation in their neighborhoods as calm,” a 12 point increase from November 2007.

Of particular note, however, is the disparity between Iraqi’s sense of security in their own neighborhoods and their sense of security outside their neighborhoods. Seventy-four percent feel “safe and secure” in their neighborhoods but only 37 percent feel safe traveling outside of their neighborhoods:

The disparity suggests that Iraqis are increasingly confined to their own neighborhoods as a result of sectarian tensions. A new study released by UCLA concluded that ethnic violence was the primary factor in reducing violence in Iraq, conclusions also echoed by the GAO. Indeed, Baghdad is now a “city of shadows” characterized by blast walls separating Shi’a and Sunni.

The report adds that as of August, 84 percent of Iraqis had confidence in the Iraqi Army to protect them from threats and 81 percent in the Iraqi Police. Far fewer have “confidence” in foreign troops:

Confidence in the Multi-National Forces, armed groups, and militias was much lower at 24%, 11%, and 11%, respectively.

The Washington Post reported on September 20 that today’s Taliban in Afghanistan is “a larger, better armed and more confident militia” than it was even a year ago, “capable of mounting sustained military assaults. Its forces operate in virtually every province and control many districts in areas ringing the capital.”

That’s also the thrust of this story on General David Petraus in this morning’s NY Times. Seven years after the U.S. routed the Taliban — and five years after John McCain suggested that the U.S. could just “muddle through” there — Afghanistan is suffering under a growing and increasingly effective Taliban insurgency.

The main takeaway, however, is Petraeus’ downplaying the extent to which a counterinsurgency approach developed in Iraq may be transferable to Afghanistan:

“The first lesson, the first caution really, is that every situation like this is truly and absolutely unique, and has its own context and specifics and its own texture,” [Petraeus] said.

“Counterinsurgents have to understand that in as nuanced a manner as possible, and then with that kind of understanding try to craft a comprehensive approach to the problems.”

That’s a rule that also should be applied to the choice of whether and when to mount a counterinsurgency campaign, or whether to undertake adventures that may eventually require it.

This is also one way to read Defense Secretary Gates’ speech to the National Defense University on Monday. Gates scolded the defense establishment’s addiction to shiny new toys, which came at the expense of a proper understanding the war we were actually in, saying that “for every heroic and resourceful innovation by troops and commanders on the battlefield, there was some institutional shortcoming at the Pentagon that they had to overcome.”

Brandon Friedman, who participated in counterinsurgency operations in both theaters, praises “Gates’ view on how the U.S. military should be oriented“:

Remember, this guy faces a withering barrage of high-tech, high-dollar defense contractors on a daily basis. So credit where credit is due.

My only concern is that he addresses the failures in process, but never touches on the prudence of starting the war in Iraq in the first place–or any future wars for that matter. However, my hope is that this is because it’s simply not his job to formulate policy. As Defense Secretary, his job is to manage the military and implement those policies emanating from the White House and Capitol Hill.

I think the Secretary of Defense may have more input on policy than Friedman allows — certainly we saw this when the SecDef was allied with a powerful Vice-President under a boy king — but his point about the prudence of the Iraq war, and of future wars, is very sound. Having an effective military is important, of course, but it’s even more important that we have an executive branch that doesn’t go about using that military irresponsibly.

It’s good and necessary to criticize the shock and awe triumphalists who assured us that the beauty of our weapons would make Iraq a cakewalk. But as we appreciate our new counterinsurgency advances — and praise the commanders who developed and applied them — let’s make sure that ten years from now, some other SecDef doesn’t have to give a speech scolding the COIN triumphalists.

Discussing the Wall Street bailout yesterday during an interview with the Des Moines Register editorial board, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said the failure of Congress to act is “just not acceptable.” Then — presumably making an attempt at humor — McCain added that, if only he were a dictator, then the bill would be just right:

MCCAIN: I just want to make a comment about the obvious issue and that is the failure of Congress to act yesterday. Its just not acceptable. [...] This is just a not acceptable situation. I’m not saying this is the perfect answer. If I were dictator, which I always aspire to be, I would write it a little bit differently.

Watch it:

McCain also complained that “people can’t reach across the aisle, you know we give poison speeches” — a seeming reference to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) so-called “partisan” floor speech on Monday that House Republicans cited for the bailout bill’s failure. Many of his House GOP colleagues, however, have since walked away from blaming Pelosi’s speech.

But less than one minute later, McCain said, “[L]et’s not point the finger of blame for a while,” despite the fact that he himself blamed Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) for the bill’s failure.

But McCain isn’t the first U.S. government official to dream of dictatorship. President Bush has said on at least two occasions that a dictatorship “would be a heck of a lot easier.”

Digg It!