Recently, Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE) said that if Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) is elected, there will be “an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.” He followed up his comment by saying that Obama will rise to the occasion, because he has “steel in his spine.” Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) quickly jumped on the first part of Biden’s comments, declaring that the fact that Obama may be tested is actually a sign of weakness:

“I’m gonna test them,” Republican John McCain said at a campaign rally in New Mexico this morning. “They’re not gonna test me.”

Increasingly, national security experts are disavowing McCain’s comments. They agree that an international crisis confronting the next president is not a sign of weakness, but rather a very likely occurrence no matter if Obama or McCain wins:

– “I think the enemy could well take advantage” of the transfer of power in Washington, said the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Michael Mullen, who launched preparations for the transition months ago

– Veteran Pentagon consultant Michael Bayer, chairman of the Defense Business Board, told his fellow panelists that the new president’s inner circle should “set aside time in transition to identify the planning, gravitas and interagency process necessary to respond to a likely first-270-day crisis.”

– Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff says the federal government is monitoring “dozens” of potential terrorists in the U.S. … Chertoff says there is a risk that some would see opportunity during the transition between administrations.

– In its Administration Transition Task Force Report issued early this year, DHS’s Homeland Security Advisory Council placed the peak threat period from 30 days prior to the change in administrations, to six months after.

In June, even close McCain confidante Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) predicted that “our enemies will test the new president early.” As all these experts pointed out, preventing such an attack from being catastrophic requires extensive planning and preparation. So far, McCain has dismissed talk of transition planning, and it doesn’t appear that he has prepared anything except tough rhetoric.

Last week, two prominent Shia ayatollahs issued religious decrees (fatwas) regarding the proposed status of forces agreement between the U.S. and Iraq.

On October 21, Lebanon’s Grand Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah criticized the security pact, saying “the Baghdad government has no right to ‘legitimize’ the presence of foreign troops,” and that any agreement should call for an unconditional withdrawal of U.S. forces:

Fadlallah’s edict came in response to questions by some Shiite members of Iraq’s parliament who asked the cleric to give his opinion about the proposed security pact. [...]

“No authority, establishment or an official or nonofficial organization has the legitimacy to impose occupation on its people, legitimize it or extend its stay in Iraq,” Fadlallah said in the edict released by his office.

Fadlallah was one of the founders of the Dawa Party in Najaf in 1957, along with his mentor Muhammad Baqr al-Sadr, a relative of Muqtada’s. Fadlallah also helped found Hizballah in Lebanon.

Fadlallah is the marja al-taqlid (source of emulation) for many in the Dawa — including Maliki — which means that they have chosen Fadlallah as a spiritual guide and committed to following his guidance in regard to correct religious practice. This, in and of itself, makes the SOFA in its current form basically a dead letter. Read more

Our guest blogger is Natalie Ondiak, a Research Associate at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

The humanitarian situation for Iraqis is dire. Since 2003, about 5 million Iraqis have been displaced: more than 2 million of these Iraqis are refugees, the majority of whom are in the region and 2.8 million are internally displaced persons. This number of displaced Iraqis represents nearly one-fifth of the entire Iraqi population. This past weekend, 13,000 Iraqis Christians in Mosul fled their homes after several weeks of violence and intimidation and were forced to seek sanctuary in neighboring areas and, in some cases, Syria.

On September 30th, the State Department announced that 13, 823 Iraqi refugees had been resettled in the US in fiscal year 2008, exceeding their 12,000 person goal. While this suggests a concerted effort by policy makers to take action to help Iraqis, the 13,823 number is not sufficient. The US has been shirking its responsibility in the face of a displacement crisis in Iraq. The number of Iraqi refugees offered US resettlement has been woefully low. Between March 2003 and 2007, the US resettled fewer than 8000 Iraqi refugees. The State Department missed its resettlement figure targets in both 2006 and 2007. In 2007, the modest Iraqi resettlement target was 5000 people, but the US resettled only 1,608 Iraqis.

The February 2006 bombing of the al-Askari Mosque in Samarra marked the beginning of an increase in sectarian violence. As the conflict has devolved into a civil war, displacement has rapidly increased. In addition to violence and insecurity, the economic situation in Iraq has continued to deteriorate. Indeed, standards of living are below what they were prior to the war and unemployment is rampant.

The majority of displaced Iraqis since 2003 have ended up in nearby countries in the region. Syria and Jordan host the most Iraq refugees — about 1.5 million between them. However, many Middle Eastern countries are also hosting large numbers of Iraqis: Read more