…seems to be the default assumption if the US – sorry, I mean the Coalition of the Willing, of course – leaves the country1.
I doubt it, or at least, doubt that it would occur in a way any more dramatic than the violence that’s already occuring there. The occupation is the irritant and the target… sure, there’d be some on-going sectarian violence2, but as has been noted elsewhere, it would be necessary for the regional powers to start using their influence for stability, for their own sake.
The best way out of this war, absolutely, was never to get into it. I believe I said so at the time. But with the greatest respect to the notion of fixing the damage done before leaving, I do think that’s impossible, because the local people will be focusing on destroying the occupation, not on rebuilding their country, as long as the occupation is in place.
This thoughtful piece of analysis from Robert Dreyfuss4 suggests that (surprise) maybe the conventional wisdom is wrong on the question of what would happen in the case of a withdrawal: