General’s
America is Braced for the General’s Verdict
Two decades ago, General David Petraeus, the man charged with winning America’s second war in Iraq, wrote a thesis for his PhD in international relations at Princeton.
Its 328 pages were an intense study of the legacies of a war that had stretched the US military, riven world opinion and deeply divided American political life. It was entitled The American Military and the Lessons of Vietnam. In one passage, the young officer took on the idea that public opinion in the US could not abide a military quagmire. ‘Vietnam was an extremely painful reminder that, when it comes to intervention, time and patience are not American virtues in abundant supply,’ Petraeus wrote in 1987. Now Petraeus is delivering another survey of an unpopular, divisive war. Only this time his audience is not a college tutor: it is the whole world.
In less than two weeks, Petraeus will appear before the US Congress and deliver a report into the progress of the ‘surge’, the military strategy launched by President George W Bush that was designed to win the Iraq war. It has been billed as a ‘make or break’ moment that could either trigger the beginnings of an American withdrawal or build on the first signs of real military success. And it will be scoured anxiously in London, where the political debate about the timing of a withdrawal of the remaining British forces is gathering pace.
In America, both sides of the political divide are breathless in anticipation. The Democrats await any hint of criticism. The Republicans have prepared a PR barrage of ‘good news’ to try to turn public opinion back behind the war effort. White House officials hail Petraeus as a ‘warrior scholar’ who finally gets what is needed to win in Iraq. They see him as a man who can save the Bush presidency.
But the reality is far more complex. The brutal truth is that the Petraeus report is unlikely to change a thing when it comes to policy on the ground: the surge and the war will go on. Its true importance lies in how it will be used politically: by the White House, by leading Democrats such as Senator Hillary Clinton, by Republican presidential hopefuls such as Rudy Giuliani.
And not least by Petraeus himself. For the highly media-savvy general has political ambitions of his own. This is his moment to shine.
A story often told about General David Howell Petraeus concerns a brush with death at Kentucky’s Fort Campbell in 1991. During a training exercise, a soldier tripped and accidentally fired his rifle. The bullet hit Petraeus in the chest. Yet he refused to leave the exercise, only relenting when a more senior general ordered him carried away on a stretcher. Even then – with the bullet missing his heart by inches – he managed to get himself discharged early from hospital after he did 50 push-ups in front of his doctor, just a few days after being shot.
The anecdote leaves little doubt that Petraeus is tough and driven. He was born in 1952 to Dutch American parents – his father, Sextus, was a seaman – and he grew up in the upstate New York town of Cornwall. It lies almost in the shadow of West Point, America’s military academy, where Petraeus duly gained admission. He excelled at high school and then graduated in the top 5 per cent of the West Point class of 1974. He also married the superintendent’s daughter. From there he carved out a successful career culminating in the rank of general.
A reputation as a ‘Washington general’ was wiped out by two tours of duty in Iraq. First he led his unit in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and then won plaudits for pacifying the northern city of Mosul in 2004. Then he took charge of the retraining and rebuilding of Iraq’s army, again winning praise for swiftly and decisively bringing on the scheme. He then co-authored the military’s new manual of counter-insurgency before, at the start of 2007, being appointed to command US forces in Iraq.
‘He’s a straight talker and he’s very highly thought of militarily,’ said Professor Donald Goldstein, a military expert at the University of Pittsburgh. Petraeus fits a lot of energy and focus into his 5ft 9in frame. He is famed for his five-mile runs, carried out even on Baghdad’s hottest days. One subordinate called him the ‘most competitive man on earth’. But his macho army bluster is also tempered by a keen intellect. His Princeton PhD is no accident. He is flexible too: he knows the war in Iraq is rarely just about bombs and bullets. In Mosul, one of his most famous catchphrases on the subject of bringing peace to the city was ‘money is ammunition’.
Yet he is not without critics. Some say he is overly fond of the media and has skilfully crafted an almost flawless public persona of the skilled tactician. Others say his focus is not just about the facts on the ground, but about his own advancement. ‘He is a sycophant incarnate. He’s a smart guy, but he’s playing politics in this,’ said Larry Johnson, a former CIA anti-terrorism official. They also point out that Petraeus’s record in Iraq can be criticized. The peace he brought to Mosul proved shortlived, and there is now a criminal investigation into missing supplies and weapons that involves officials close to Petraeus. His time in Iraq has seen the emergence of death squads and heightened sectarianism. ‘This has all happened on his watch,’ said Johnson.
But what will his report say? First, some media spin needs to be cut through. Petraeus has been used as an impressive, patriotic figure on which to hang such an important study. That suits both the White House and Petraeus himself. But his tough persona masks a more nuanced approach from the administration.
In fact, the Petraeus report will be a mix of analyzes from Petraeus and the US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker. Its exact wording will have heavy influence from White House officials. For those hoping that the report will contain a damning indictment of the war or prompt any meaningful troop reduction – or full withdrawal – there is almost certain to be deep disappointment. ‘It is frankly delusional for anyone to think it is going to change policy,’ said Charles Pena, a senior fellow at think-tank the Independent Institute. ‘They [Petraeus and Crocker] have no choice but to try to implement administration policy.’
And that policy is showing some signs of success. The military surge of troop numbers pushed by Bush has had an impact. The report will probably point to success stories in former hotbeds of Sunni insurgency such as Ramadi, Tal Afar and Mosul, where the security situation has been brought under some degree of control. In these areas, strategic alliances with Sunni tribes have seen former insurgents working with the US against Islamic jihadists. ‘There has been progress militarily. It is fair to say that,’ said Professor Rick Stoll, a defence and warfare expert at Rice University.
A taste of what Petraeus’s presentation might look like has already been given. On a recent trip by Democrat and Republican politicians to Iraq, he sat down, armed with charts and Powerpoint slides, to illustrate the advances made by the surge. An account of the meeting by Democrat Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky gives the lie to anyone expecting a military withdrawal from Iraq. She revealed to one newspaper that Petraeus told her America would be in Iraq in some way ‘for nine to 10 years’.
While the surge has changed the nature of the conflict, it has not yet brought it much closer to an end. As the brutal Sunni insurgency has tailed off, it has been replaced by Shia violence. The report is likely to note that the war has now become a fight between Shia militant groups and the US military. By last July, according to US officials, Shia fighters accounted for 73 per cent of attacks on coalition forces. That has been matched by a total failure of the Iraqi political process and a collapse of relations between the majority Shia – represented by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki – and the US. The surge’s aim was to ‘buy time’ for reconciliation between Iraq’s warring sectarian factions, but instead the feuding blocs have grown more violently apart. ‘No one wants to talk about reconciliation. No one wants to listen,’ said one official recently returned from Iraq. ‘The only reconciliation that is taking place is between the US military and some Sunni insurgents. That is not going to solve Iraq’s problems in the long run.’
So that will be the twin messages of Petraeus and Crocker. The military aspect of the surge is starting to turn the tide. But the political opportunity it was designed to create is being wasted by the Iraqis. If that sounds familiar, that is because it is the official White House stance on Iraq. ‘He is going to say that, from a military standpoint, it is going well, but, from a political standpoint, it is difficult and the Iraqis have to stand up for themselves. That is what Bush says,’ said Goldstein.
But if the contents of the report appear predictable, its impact is harder to ascertain. One thing is clear: it is unlikely to precipitate any rush significantly to withdraw US forces. It will allow the White House to claim that its strategy is working and that to halt the surge – as most Democrats wish to do – would be to snatch victory away from their troops.
Most experts believe that the White House will keep US troop levels at the current force of about 160,000 until at least April. Then to maintain the surge the army would need to extend its current rotation period from 15 months to 18 months. That is seen as too much of a burden by many military leaders.
Therefore it is widely predicted that the US presence in Iraq could be down to pre-surge levels of 130,000 troops by September next year. That could be presented as the beginning of a withdrawal, but it is hardly the sort of conflict-ending momentum that many Democrats – and much of the American public – seem to want. However, there is little political pressure on Bush to change policy in Iraq. He does not face re-election and the Democrats have shown that they are unwilling to do the one thing that could end the war: cut off funding. Again, the Petraeus report will not provide them with motivation to harden their stance. ‘The President has called the Democrats’ bluff. They don’t have the stomach for defunding, so there is no political pressure on the White House,’ said Pena.
But that is not true for any of the presidential candidates. They are all feeling the heat. For the Democrats, the Petraeus report is likely to contain enough bad news for them to continue their largely symbolic push for a troop withdrawal, but it will also have the risk that they will look as if they are undermining the first signs of success on the ground. For Republicans, it poses the opposite problem. The top-tier candidates, such as Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, have seen what happened to the campaign of John McCain, the most vocal supporter of Bush’s surge policy: his support has almost collapsed. Yet the Petraeus report is likely to force them to toe the White House line more tightly and in the face of much public hostility. Or it could cause them to go against the White House, following a pro-withdrawal line and opening up huge splits in the party itself. Those chasms are already becoming evident, with some top Republican figures, such as Senator John Warner, already calling for troop withdrawals to begin this year.
But above all the political squabbling will be Bush. No matter what happens, he will be President for all of 2008. And he shows no sign of any significant change of tack. Despite being billed as a watershed moment, the only real prospect of a reversal of Iraq policy will come in January 2009, when a new President walks into the Oval Office. The brutal fact is that there remains no meaningful end in sight for the US involvement in Iraq. Vietnam proved that the difference between when a war becomes unpopular and when it ends can be many years. In July 1967, the public approval rating of the Vietnam war dropped forever below 50 per cent, yet America did not leave Vietnam totally until 1975.
A similar process could be repeating itself in Iraq. Petraeus – as a keen student of history – would probably privately think that a tragedy. In his PhD thesis 20 years ago, he wrote: ‘Vietnam was a painful reminder for the military that they, not the transient occupants of high office, generally bear the heaviest burden during armed conflict.’
That is a trenchant analysis. But it was written by the Petraeus of Princeton. The Petraeus of next month is a general playing the highest political stakes of his career in front of the eyes of the world. He is unlikely to be so candid again.
Iraq benchmarks
Iraq has failed to meet all but three of 18 congressionally mandated benchmarks for political and military progress, according to a draft of a Government Accountability Office report to be presented to Congress on Tuesday.
Achieved: The protection of the rights of minority political parties in the Iraqi legislature. It is the only one of eight political benchmarks to have been met, the report says. However, the report does not concern itself with attacks on these parties outside of the legislature.
Failed: In other areas, the political process is judged to have been a failure, including the continued non-passage of legislation on constitutional reform, new oil laws and de-Baathification. Observers say the parliament rarely has sufficient members in attendance to have a quorum to consider legislation.
Mixed progress: On the security front, Iraq has met on two benchmarks. Despite the surge, violence remains roughly at the same levels. However, the number of Iraqi army units capable of operating independently has dropped from 10 in March to six last month.
Two Generals, Two Children – and Two Views of Chile’s Coup
Marco Antonio Pinochet was a 16-year-old on a skiing holiday in the Andes, 100 miles from Santiago, when the 1973 Chilean coup led by his father, General Augusto Pinochet, took place.
“I remember that day”, he said, sitting in a restaurant in the Providencia district of the capital. “We were meant to go skiing, but when we woke up, we found on the radio that it was a different day.”
Marco Antonio is now a tanned, smartly dressed real estate businessman, a trained pilot, and – as the eve of the 30th anniversary of the coup nears – increasingly the family spokesman.
“I think this is a good time for the reunion of the country,” he said of the anniversary on September 11. “What I want is for the country to forgive, but not forget.”
There have been many television programmes and newspaper articles about the anniversary. Most of them had concentrated too much on human rights issues, he said. “You have to think that in 17 years a government has bad things, like the human rights violations, but you have many other good things,” he said, speaking in the English he learned while a student and in business in the US.
“The achievements were the economy and leaving the country with a democratic system, the peaceful transfer from the authoritarian system to democracy.”
What did he think would have happened if the democratically elected president, Salvador Allende, had been allowed to serve out his term? “It would be like Cuba, with a different Fidel,” he replied. “It is difficult to know if Allende would [still be in power] or another more authoritarian person from the left.”
What about the disappearances and torture after the coup? “I think there were excesses … The security forces had too much independence, so when they had to react against the terrorists, they had to react with excess.”
His father was commander in chief throughout this period, so was the general not aware of what was being done?
“I think he knew – that doesn’t mean he ordered,” he said. “I don’t support any excess, I don’t agree with that, but I try to understand.”
What had he thought about his father’s detention in the UK from 1998 to 1999, at the request of the Spanish government?
“The [British] government was a Labour government, with many people in it against my father, so I suppose they reacted as they reacted. It doesn’t mean that the British people were the same.”
On this September 11, he said, “we will have a mass in church with a group of friends. It will be a time of commemoration, but not celebration.”
Where did his own political sympathies lie? “I am centre-right – my brain is in the right and my heart on the left side.”
His father has been allowed to avoid trial because of his mental state, so what is the former dictator’s health like now? “He has not lost his reason. He has problems with his memory. He can remember things that happened 50 years ago, but not what happened two years ago. It is like a jigsaw puzzle.” Gen Pinochet was still in touch with Baroness Thatcher, he said.
Does Gen Pinochet have regrets?
“Everyone has regrets for what he did in his life, so why should he be different?”
Assassination
General Carlos Prats was the Chilean commander in chief who refused to join Gen Pinochet and his plotters and later paid with his life for his loyalty to Allende.
There is a silver cigar box on the table of his daughter’s house in the Las Condes district of Santiago. It is inscribed to Sofia Prats’s father from President Allende.
At the time the present was given, they were the two most powerful men in Chile. Within three years they were both dead, Allende apparently by his own hand and Prats through a bomb planted by his former military colleagues – an assassination, many believe, authorised by Gen Pinochet.
Sofia Prats remained in Chile after the coup and was for 10 years the mayor of Huechuraba, an outlying district of the capital, where she is still a councillor. She is currently studying law. She remembered the day of the coup clearly, because she was heavily pregnant with her fourth child: “What bothered me most was not to have the baby on that day, and in fact I had it on the 29th.”
Her father’s opposition to the coup, which had been planned for months, had led to a group of senior army wives descending on the Prats house to try to persuade his wife to influence him.
“It was very hard for my mother, because some of the women who came had been friends of hers since she was at school,” she said.
After the coup, Gen and Mrs Prats left the country. They went to Buenos Aires, where he started writing his memoirs, which contained damaging material about Gen Pinochet.
A year later, a car bomb in Buenos Aires killed Sofia’s parents.
Argentina has sought the extradition of eight people believed to be responsible for the bombing, including Gen Pinochet. Five of them – four from the military – have finally been detained in Chile and face trial there. Two others are in the process of being extradited for trial in Argentina. Gen Pinochet has been excused trial because of his mental state.
Of the Chilean government’s current plans to put senior officers on trial, but grant immunity to others who give information, Sofia said: “The most we want is that people know who were the criminals, and know the truth.”
Her father left a letter for Gen Pinochet saying: “The future will tell who was wrong”. What would she say now about the judgment of history?
“My father visualised the horrors we were going to live through, and how our society would be marked by this coup profoundly. He said it would take many, many years until we could recover. He studied a lot of history, so he remembered what happened in 1891 – there was civil war at that time and he [thought] the same pattern would be repeated if we had a coup. He tried to make people understand that they had to try and find a political way to solve the problems Chile had at that time … Maybe others did not read so much history.”
His memoirs, she said, explained how the military would be abandoned by the same people who had benefited from the coup. “Not only the politicians, but also the economic groups, they have left the armed forces with the guilt,” she said.
Of Gen Pinochet, she added: “The more we know about how things were during the coup and after the coup, his personality is revealed as he is and was. Last night, I was listening to a TV documentary and they had recordings of Pinochet’s conversations [from that period] and how Pinochet said that they would put Allende in an aeroplane and throw him away. So you can see how his criminal mind was present at that very moment. There were no moral limits. Now that we know from the military that many people were thrown into the sea from planes, we can see from where that idea comes.
“He says ‘I knew nothing about what was happening’. That’s incredible. Of course, I hold Pinochet responsible for my parents’ deaths.”
Top Us Generals Reject War Tsar Role for Iraq and Afghanistan
Three retired generals approached by the White House about a new high-profile post overseeing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and reporting directly to the president have rejected the proposed post, leaving the administration struggling to find anyone of stature willing to take it on.
One of the four-star generals said he declined because of the chaotic way the war was being run and because Dick Cheney, the vice-president and the leading hawk in the Bush administration, retained more influence than pragmatists looking for a way out.
The deputy White House spokeswoman, Dana Perino, confirmed yesterday that George Bush was considering restructuring the administration to create a new post, dubbed the war tsar by US media. It would involve co-ordinating the work of the defence, state and other departments at what she described as a critical stage in the wars. One of the retired generals approached, Marine General John Sheehan, told the Washington Post: “The very fundamental issue is they don’t know where the hell they’re going.”
The unwillingness of the generals to take the job undermines recent attempts by the Bush administration to put a positive spin on the Iraq war. Mr Bush has claimed repeatedly over the past few weeks that there are signs his strategy of pouring extra US troops into Baghdad and neighbouring Anbar province is working.
The proposal to create the job comes after the departure of Meghan O’Sullivan, the 37-year-old who had the top national security council job on Iraq and Afghanistan. She was responsible for policy but had no power to implement it. The proposed war tsar would have the power to issue orders, and would be answerable directly to the president and his national security adviser, Stephen Hadley.
Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the national security council, said the White House had sought advice from a number of people about the job but insisted it had not been offered to anyone. “The White House is looking into creating a higher profile position that would have the single, full-time focus on implementing and executing the recently completed strategic reviews for both Iraq and Afghanistan.”
Gen Sheehan said Mr Cheney and his allies “are still in the positions of most influence” in spite of two leading pragmatists, the defence secretary, Robert Gates, and the secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, winning support in the past four months for a diplomatic approach. After two weeks of discussing the job with Mr Hadley, Gen Sheehan rejected it: “So rather than go over there, develop an ulcer and eventually leave, I said, ‘No, thanks.’”
Mr Cheney last week reiterated claims of links between al-Qaida and Saddam Hussein’s Iraq in spite of newly released US intelligence assessments saying there had been no evidence. Mr Cheney, unlike Mr Gates and Ms Rice, also favours air strikes against Iran’s nuclear sites.
The US continued to put pressure on Iran yesterday. Major-General William Caldwell, a US military spokesman, in Baghdad yesterday repeated claims that Tehran was supplying Iraqi insurgents with explosive devices used in ambushes on US and British troops but also claimed Iran was training insurgents to use the explosives. He said the information had been gleaned from interrogation of detainees as recently as this month, some of whom said they had been in Iranian training camps. “We know that they [the explosive devices] are being in fact manufactured and smuggled into this country, and we know that training does go on in Iran for people to learn how to assemble them and how to employ them,” he said.
America is Braced for the General’s Verdict
Two decades ago, General David Petraeus, the man charged with winning America’s second war in Iraq, wrote a thesis for his PhD in international relations at Princeton.
Its 328 pages were an intense study of the legacies of a war that had stretched the US military, riven world opinion and deeply divided American political life. It was entitled The American Military and the Lessons of Vietnam. In one passage, the young officer took on the idea that public opinion in the US could not abide a military quagmire. ‘Vietnam was an extremely painful reminder that, when it comes to intervention, time and patience are not American virtues in abundant supply,’ Petraeus wrote in 1987. Now Petraeus is delivering another survey of an unpopular, divisive war. Only this time his audience is not a college tutor: it is the whole world.
In less than two weeks, Petraeus will appear before the US Congress and deliver a report into the progress of the ‘surge’, the military strategy launched by President George W Bush that was designed to win the Iraq war. It has been billed as a ‘make or break’ moment that could either trigger the beginnings of an American withdrawal or build on the first signs of real military success. And it will be scoured anxiously in London, where the political debate about the timing of a withdrawal of the remaining British forces is gathering pace.
In America, both sides of the political divide are breathless in anticipation. The Democrats await any hint of criticism. The Republicans have prepared a PR barrage of ‘good news’ to try to turn public opinion back behind the war effort. White House officials hail Petraeus as a ‘warrior scholar’ who finally gets what is needed to win in Iraq. They see him as a man who can save the Bush presidency.
But the reality is far more complex. The brutal truth is that the Petraeus report is unlikely to change a thing when it comes to policy on the ground: the surge and the war will go on. Its true importance lies in how it will be used politically: by the White House, by leading Democrats such as Senator Hillary Clinton, by Republican presidential hopefuls such as Rudy Giuliani.
And not least by Petraeus himself. For the highly media-savvy general has political ambitions of his own. This is his moment to shine.
A story often told about General David Howell Petraeus concerns a brush with death at Kentucky’s Fort Campbell in 1991. During a training exercise, a soldier tripped and accidentally fired his rifle. The bullet hit Petraeus in the chest. Yet he refused to leave the exercise, only relenting when a more senior general ordered him carried away on a stretcher. Even then – with the bullet missing his heart by inches – he managed to get himself discharged early from hospital after he did 50 push-ups in front of his doctor, just a few days after being shot.
The anecdote leaves little doubt that Petraeus is tough and driven. He was born in 1952 to Dutch American parents – his father, Sextus, was a seaman – and he grew up in the upstate New York town of Cornwall. It lies almost in the shadow of West Point, America’s military academy, where Petraeus duly gained admission. He excelled at high school and then graduated in the top 5 per cent of the West Point class of 1974. He also married the superintendent’s daughter. From there he carved out a successful career culminating in the rank of general.
A reputation as a ‘Washington general’ was wiped out by two tours of duty in Iraq. First he led his unit in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and then won plaudits for pacifying the northern city of Mosul in 2004. Then he took charge of the retraining and rebuilding of Iraq’s army, again winning praise for swiftly and decisively bringing on the scheme. He then co-authored the military’s new manual of counter-insurgency before, at the start of 2007, being appointed to command US forces in Iraq.
‘He’s a straight talker and he’s very highly thought of militarily,’ said Professor Donald Goldstein, a military expert at the University of Pittsburgh. Petraeus fits a lot of energy and focus into his 5ft 9in frame. He is famed for his five-mile runs, carried out even on Baghdad’s hottest days. One subordinate called him the ‘most competitive man on earth’. But his macho army bluster is also tempered by a keen intellect. His Princeton PhD is no accident. He is flexible too: he knows the war in Iraq is rarely just about bombs and bullets. In Mosul, one of his most famous catchphrases on the subject of bringing peace to the city was ‘money is ammunition’.
Yet he is not without critics. Some say he is overly fond of the media and has skilfully crafted an almost flawless public persona of the skilled tactician. Others say his focus is not just about the facts on the ground, but about his own advancement. ‘He is a sycophant incarnate. He’s a smart guy, but he’s playing politics in this,’ said Larry Johnson, a former CIA anti-terrorism official. They also point out that Petraeus’s record in Iraq can be criticized. The peace he brought to Mosul proved shortlived, and there is now a criminal investigation into missing supplies and weapons that involves officials close to Petraeus. His time in Iraq has seen the emergence of death squads and heightened sectarianism. ‘This has all happened on his watch,’ said Johnson.
But what will his report say? First, some media spin needs to be cut through. Petraeus has been used as an impressive, patriotic figure on which to hang such an important study. That suits both the White House and Petraeus himself. But his tough persona masks a more nuanced approach from the administration.
In fact, the Petraeus report will be a mix of analyzes from Petraeus and the US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker. Its exact wording will have heavy influence from White House officials. For those hoping that the report will contain a damning indictment of the war or prompt any meaningful troop reduction – or full withdrawal – there is almost certain to be deep disappointment. ‘It is frankly delusional for anyone to think it is going to change policy,’ said Charles Pena, a senior fellow at think-tank the Independent Institute. ‘They [Petraeus and Crocker] have no choice but to try to implement administration policy.’
And that policy is showing some signs of success. The military surge of troop numbers pushed by Bush has had an impact. The report will probably point to success stories in former hotbeds of Sunni insurgency such as Ramadi, Tal Afar and Mosul, where the security situation has been brought under some degree of control. In these areas, strategic alliances with Sunni tribes have seen former insurgents working with the US against Islamic jihadists. ‘There has been progress militarily. It is fair to say that,’ said Professor Rick Stoll, a defence and warfare expert at Rice University.
A taste of what Petraeus’s presentation might look like has already been given. On a recent trip by Democrat and Republican politicians to Iraq, he sat down, armed with charts and Powerpoint slides, to illustrate the advances made by the surge. An account of the meeting by Democrat Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky gives the lie to anyone expecting a military withdrawal from Iraq. She revealed to one newspaper that Petraeus told her America would be in Iraq in some way ‘for nine to 10 years’.
While the surge has changed the nature of the conflict, it has not yet brought it much closer to an end. As the brutal Sunni insurgency has tailed off, it has been replaced by Shia violence. The report is likely to note that the war has now become a fight between Shia militant groups and the US military. By last July, according to US officials, Shia fighters accounted for 73 per cent of attacks on coalition forces. That has been matched by a total failure of the Iraqi political process and a collapse of relations between the majority Shia – represented by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki – and the US. The surge’s aim was to ‘buy time’ for reconciliation between Iraq’s warring sectarian factions, but instead the feuding blocs have grown more violently apart. ‘No one wants to talk about reconciliation. No one wants to listen,’ said one official recently returned from Iraq. ‘The only reconciliation that is taking place is between the US military and some Sunni insurgents. That is not going to solve Iraq’s problems in the long run.’
So that will be the twin messages of Petraeus and Crocker. The military aspect of the surge is starting to turn the tide. But the political opportunity it was designed to create is being wasted by the Iraqis. If that sounds familiar, that is because it is the official White House stance on Iraq. ‘He is going to say that, from a military standpoint, it is going well, but, from a political standpoint, it is difficult and the Iraqis have to stand up for themselves. That is what Bush says,’ said Goldstein.
But if the contents of the report appear predictable, its impact is harder to ascertain. One thing is clear: it is unlikely to precipitate any rush significantly to withdraw US forces. It will allow the White House to claim that its strategy is working and that to halt the surge – as most Democrats wish to do – would be to snatch victory away from their troops.
Most experts believe that the White House will keep US troop levels at the current force of about 160,000 until at least April. Then to maintain the surge the army would need to extend its current rotation period from 15 months to 18 months. That is seen as too much of a burden by many military leaders.
Therefore it is widely predicted that the US presence in Iraq could be down to pre-surge levels of 130,000 troops by September next year. That could be presented as the beginning of a withdrawal, but it is hardly the sort of conflict-ending momentum that many Democrats – and much of the American public – seem to want. However, there is little political pressure on Bush to change policy in Iraq. He does not face re-election and the Democrats have shown that they are unwilling to do the one thing that could end the war: cut off funding. Again, the Petraeus report will not provide them with motivation to harden their stance. ‘The President has called the Democrats’ bluff. They don’t have the stomach for defunding, so there is no political pressure on the White House,’ said Pena.
But that is not true for any of the presidential candidates. They are all feeling the heat. For the Democrats, the Petraeus report is likely to contain enough bad news for them to continue their largely symbolic push for a troop withdrawal, but it will also have the risk that they will look as if they are undermining the first signs of success on the ground. For Republicans, it poses the opposite problem. The top-tier candidates, such as Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, have seen what happened to the campaign of John McCain, the most vocal supporter of Bush’s surge policy: his support has almost collapsed. Yet the Petraeus report is likely to force them to toe the White House line more tightly and in the face of much public hostility. Or it could cause them to go against the White House, following a pro-withdrawal line and opening up huge splits in the party itself. Those chasms are already becoming evident, with some top Republican figures, such as Senator John Warner, already calling for troop withdrawals to begin this year.
But above all the political squabbling will be Bush. No matter what happens, he will be President for all of 2008. And he shows no sign of any significant change of tack. Despite being billed as a watershed moment, the only real prospect of a reversal of Iraq policy will come in January 2009, when a new President walks into the Oval Office. The brutal fact is that there remains no meaningful end in sight for the US involvement in Iraq. Vietnam proved that the difference between when a war becomes unpopular and when it ends can be many years. In July 1967, the public approval rating of the Vietnam war dropped forever below 50 per cent, yet America did not leave Vietnam totally until 1975.
A similar process could be repeating itself in Iraq. Petraeus – as a keen student of history – would probably privately think that a tragedy. In his PhD thesis 20 years ago, he wrote: ‘Vietnam was a painful reminder for the military that they, not the transient occupants of high office, generally bear the heaviest burden during armed conflict.’
That is a trenchant analysis. But it was written by the Petraeus of Princeton. The Petraeus of next month is a general playing the highest political stakes of his career in front of the eyes of the world. He is unlikely to be so candid again.
Iraq benchmarks
Iraq has failed to meet all but three of 18 congressionally mandated benchmarks for political and military progress, according to a draft of a Government Accountability Office report to be presented to Congress on Tuesday.
Achieved: The protection of the rights of minority political parties in the Iraqi legislature. It is the only one of eight political benchmarks to have been met, the report says. However, the report does not concern itself with attacks on these parties outside of the legislature.
Failed: In other areas, the political process is judged to have been a failure, including the continued non-passage of legislation on constitutional reform, new oil laws and de-Baathification. Observers say the parliament rarely has sufficient members in attendance to have a quorum to consider legislation.
Mixed progress: On the security front, Iraq has met on two benchmarks. Despite the surge, violence remains roughly at the same levels. However, the number of Iraqi army units capable of operating independently has dropped from 10 in March to six last month.
America is Braced for the General’s Verdict
Two decades ago, General David Petraeus, the man charged with winning America’s second war in Iraq, wrote a thesis for his PhD in international relations at Princeton.
Its 328 pages were an intense study of the legacies of a war that had stretched the US military, riven world opinion and deeply divided American political life. It was entitled The American Military and the Lessons of Vietnam. In one passage, the young officer took on the idea that public opinion in the US could not abide a military quagmire. ‘Vietnam was an extremely painful reminder that, when it comes to intervention, time and patience are not American virtues in abundant supply,’ Petraeus wrote in 1987. Now Petraeus is delivering another survey of an unpopular, divisive war. Only this time his audience is not a college tutor: it is the whole world.
In less than two weeks, Petraeus will appear before the US Congress and deliver a report into the progress of the ‘surge’, the military strategy launched by President George W Bush that was designed to win the Iraq war. It has been billed as a ‘make or break’ moment that could either trigger the beginnings of an American withdrawal or build on the first signs of real military success. And it will be scoured anxiously in London, where the political debate about the timing of a withdrawal of the remaining British forces is gathering pace.
In America, both sides of the political divide are breathless in anticipation. The Democrats await any hint of criticism. The Republicans have prepared a PR barrage of ‘good news’ to try to turn public opinion back behind the war effort. White House officials hail Petraeus as a ‘warrior scholar’ who finally gets what is needed to win in Iraq. They see him as a man who can save the Bush presidency.
But the reality is far more complex. The brutal truth is that the Petraeus report is unlikely to change a thing when it comes to policy on the ground: the surge and the war will go on. Its true importance lies in how it will be used politically: by the White House, by leading Democrats such as Senator Hillary Clinton, by Republican presidential hopefuls such as Rudy Giuliani.
And not least by Petraeus himself. For the highly media-savvy general has political ambitions of his own. This is his moment to shine.
A story often told about General David Howell Petraeus concerns a brush with death at Kentucky’s Fort Campbell in 1991. During a training exercise, a soldier tripped and accidentally fired his rifle. The bullet hit Petraeus in the chest. Yet he refused to leave the exercise, only relenting when a more senior general ordered him carried away on a stretcher. Even then – with the bullet missing his heart by inches – he managed to get himself discharged early from hospital after he did 50 push-ups in front of his doctor, just a few days after being shot.
The anecdote leaves little doubt that Petraeus is tough and driven. He was born in 1952 to Dutch American parents – his father, Sextus, was a seaman – and he grew up in the upstate New York town of Cornwall. It lies almost in the shadow of West Point, America’s military academy, where Petraeus duly gained admission. He excelled at high school and then graduated in the top 5 per cent of the West Point class of 1974. He also married the superintendent’s daughter. From there he carved out a successful career culminating in the rank of general.
A reputation as a ‘Washington general’ was wiped out by two tours of duty in Iraq. First he led his unit in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and then won plaudits for pacifying the northern city of Mosul in 2004. Then he took charge of the retraining and rebuilding of Iraq’s army, again winning praise for swiftly and decisively bringing on the scheme. He then co-authored the military’s new manual of counter-insurgency before, at the start of 2007, being appointed to command US forces in Iraq.
‘He’s a straight talker and he’s very highly thought of militarily,’ said Professor Donald Goldstein, a military expert at the University of Pittsburgh. Petraeus fits a lot of energy and focus into his 5ft 9in frame. He is famed for his five-mile runs, carried out even on Baghdad’s hottest days. One subordinate called him the ‘most competitive man on earth’. But his macho army bluster is also tempered by a keen intellect. His Princeton PhD is no accident. He is flexible too: he knows the war in Iraq is rarely just about bombs and bullets. In Mosul, one of his most famous catchphrases on the subject of bringing peace to the city was ‘money is ammunition’.
Yet he is not without critics. Some say he is overly fond of the media and has skilfully crafted an almost flawless public persona of the skilled tactician. Others say his focus is not just about the facts on the ground, but about his own advancement. ‘He is a sycophant incarnate. He’s a smart guy, but he’s playing politics in this,’ said Larry Johnson, a former CIA anti-terrorism official. They also point out that Petraeus’s record in Iraq can be criticized. The peace he brought to Mosul proved shortlived, and there is now a criminal investigation into missing supplies and weapons that involves officials close to Petraeus. His time in Iraq has seen the emergence of death squads and heightened sectarianism. ‘This has all happened on his watch,’ said Johnson.
But what will his report say? First, some media spin needs to be cut through. Petraeus has been used as an impressive, patriotic figure on which to hang such an important study. That suits both the White House and Petraeus himself. But his tough persona masks a more nuanced approach from the administration.
In fact, the Petraeus report will be a mix of analyzes from Petraeus and the US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker. Its exact wording will have heavy influence from White House officials. For those hoping that the report will contain a damning indictment of the war or prompt any meaningful troop reduction – or full withdrawal – there is almost certain to be deep disappointment. ‘It is frankly delusional for anyone to think it is going to change policy,’ said Charles Pena, a senior fellow at think-tank the Independent Institute. ‘They [Petraeus and Crocker] have no choice but to try to implement administration policy.’
And that policy is showing some signs of success. The military surge of troop numbers pushed by Bush has had an impact. The report will probably point to success stories in former hotbeds of Sunni insurgency such as Ramadi, Tal Afar and Mosul, where the security situation has been brought under some degree of control. In these areas, strategic alliances with Sunni tribes have seen former insurgents working with the US against Islamic jihadists. ‘There has been progress militarily. It is fair to say that,’ said Professor Rick Stoll, a defence and warfare expert at Rice University.
A taste of what Petraeus’s presentation might look like has already been given. On a recent trip by Democrat and Republican politicians to Iraq, he sat down, armed with charts and Powerpoint slides, to illustrate the advances made by the surge. An account of the meeting by Democrat Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky gives the lie to anyone expecting a military withdrawal from Iraq. She revealed to one newspaper that Petraeus told her America would be in Iraq in some way ‘for nine to 10 years’.
While the surge has changed the nature of the conflict, it has not yet brought it much closer to an end. As the brutal Sunni insurgency has tailed off, it has been replaced by Shia violence. The report is likely to note that the war has now become a fight between Shia militant groups and the US military. By last July, according to US officials, Shia fighters accounted for 73 per cent of attacks on coalition forces. That has been matched by a total failure of the Iraqi political process and a collapse of relations between the majority Shia – represented by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki – and the US. The surge’s aim was to ‘buy time’ for reconciliation between Iraq’s warring sectarian factions, but instead the feuding blocs have grown more violently apart. ‘No one wants to talk about reconciliation. No one wants to listen,’ said one official recently returned from Iraq. ‘The only reconciliation that is taking place is between the US military and some Sunni insurgents. That is not going to solve Iraq’s problems in the long run.’
So that will be the twin messages of Petraeus and Crocker. The military aspect of the surge is starting to turn the tide. But the political opportunity it was designed to create is being wasted by the Iraqis. If that sounds familiar, that is because it is the official White House stance on Iraq. ‘He is going to say that, from a military standpoint, it is going well, but, from a political standpoint, it is difficult and the Iraqis have to stand up for themselves. That is what Bush says,’ said Goldstein.
But if the contents of the report appear predictable, its impact is harder to ascertain. One thing is clear: it is unlikely to precipitate any rush significantly to withdraw US forces. It will allow the White House to claim that its strategy is working and that to halt the surge – as most Democrats wish to do – would be to snatch victory away from their troops.
Most experts believe that the White House will keep US troop levels at the current force of about 160,000 until at least April. Then to maintain the surge the army would need to extend its current rotation period from 15 months to 18 months. That is seen as too much of a burden by many military leaders.
Therefore it is widely predicted that the US presence in Iraq could be down to pre-surge levels of 130,000 troops by September next year. That could be presented as the beginning of a withdrawal, but it is hardly the sort of conflict-ending momentum that many Democrats – and much of the American public – seem to want. However, there is little political pressure on Bush to change policy in Iraq. He does not face re-election and the Democrats have shown that they are unwilling to do the one thing that could end the war: cut off funding. Again, the Petraeus report will not provide them with motivation to harden their stance. ‘The President has called the Democrats’ bluff. They don’t have the stomach for defunding, so there is no political pressure on the White House,’ said Pena.
But that is not true for any of the presidential candidates. They are all feeling the heat. For the Democrats, the Petraeus report is likely to contain enough bad news for them to continue their largely symbolic push for a troop withdrawal, but it will also have the risk that they will look as if they are undermining the first signs of success on the ground. For Republicans, it poses the opposite problem. The top-tier candidates, such as Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, have seen what happened to the campaign of John McCain, the most vocal supporter of Bush’s surge policy: his support has almost collapsed. Yet the Petraeus report is likely to force them to toe the White House line more tightly and in the face of much public hostility. Or it could cause them to go against the White House, following a pro-withdrawal line and opening up huge splits in the party itself. Those chasms are already becoming evident, with some top Republican figures, such as Senator John Warner, already calling for troop withdrawals to begin this year.
But above all the political squabbling will be Bush. No matter what happens, he will be President for all of 2008. And he shows no sign of any significant change of tack. Despite being billed as a watershed moment, the only real prospect of a reversal of Iraq policy will come in January 2009, when a new President walks into the Oval Office. The brutal fact is that there remains no meaningful end in sight for the US involvement in Iraq. Vietnam proved that the difference between when a war becomes unpopular and when it ends can be many years. In July 1967, the public approval rating of the Vietnam war dropped forever below 50 per cent, yet America did not leave Vietnam totally until 1975.
A similar process could be repeating itself in Iraq. Petraeus – as a keen student of history – would probably privately think that a tragedy. In his PhD thesis 20 years ago, he wrote: ‘Vietnam was a painful reminder for the military that they, not the transient occupants of high office, generally bear the heaviest burden during armed conflict.’
That is a trenchant analysis. But it was written by the Petraeus of Princeton. The Petraeus of next month is a general playing the highest political stakes of his career in front of the eyes of the world. He is unlikely to be so candid again.
Iraq benchmarks
Iraq has failed to meet all but three of 18 congressionally mandated benchmarks for political and military progress, according to a draft of a Government Accountability Office report to be presented to Congress on Tuesday.
Achieved: The protection of the rights of minority political parties in the Iraqi legislature. It is the only one of eight political benchmarks to have been met, the report says. However, the report does not concern itself with attacks on these parties outside of the legislature.
Failed: In other areas, the political process is judged to have been a failure, including the continued non-passage of legislation on constitutional reform, new oil laws and de-Baathification. Observers say the parliament rarely has sufficient members in attendance to have a quorum to consider legislation.
Mixed progress: On the security front, Iraq has met on two benchmarks. Despite the surge, violence remains roughly at the same levels. However, the number of Iraqi army units capable of operating independently has dropped from 10 in March to six last month.
America is Braced for the General’s Verdict
Two decades ago, General David Petraeus, the man charged with winning America’s second war in Iraq, wrote a thesis for his PhD in international relations at Princeton.
Its 328 pages were an intense study of the legacies of a war that had stretched the US military, riven world opinion and deeply divided American political life. It was entitled The American Military and the Lessons of Vietnam. In one passage, the young officer took on the idea that public opinion in the US could not abide a military quagmire. ‘Vietnam was an extremely painful reminder that, when it comes to intervention, time and patience are not American virtues in abundant supply,’ Petraeus wrote in 1987. Now Petraeus is delivering another survey of an unpopular, divisive war. Only this time his audience is not a college tutor: it is the whole world.
In less than two weeks, Petraeus will appear before the US Congress and deliver a report into the progress of the ‘surge’, the military strategy launched by President George W Bush that was designed to win the Iraq war. It has been billed as a ‘make or break’ moment that could either trigger the beginnings of an American withdrawal or build on the first signs of real military success. And it will be scoured anxiously in London, where the political debate about the timing of a withdrawal of the remaining British forces is gathering pace.
In America, both sides of the political divide are breathless in anticipation. The Democrats await any hint of criticism. The Republicans have prepared a PR barrage of ‘good news’ to try to turn public opinion back behind the war effort. White House officials hail Petraeus as a ‘warrior scholar’ who finally gets what is needed to win in Iraq. They see him as a man who can save the Bush presidency.
But the reality is far more complex. The brutal truth is that the Petraeus report is unlikely to change a thing when it comes to policy on the ground: the surge and the war will go on. Its true importance lies in how it will be used politically: by the White House, by leading Democrats such as Senator Hillary Clinton, by Republican presidential hopefuls such as Rudy Giuliani.
And not least by Petraeus himself. For the highly media-savvy general has political ambitions of his own. This is his moment to shine.
A story often told about General David Howell Petraeus concerns a brush with death at Kentucky’s Fort Campbell in 1991. During a training exercise, a soldier tripped and accidentally fired his rifle. The bullet hit Petraeus in the chest. Yet he refused to leave the exercise, only relenting when a more senior general ordered him carried away on a stretcher. Even then – with the bullet missing his heart by inches – he managed to get himself discharged early from hospital after he did 50 push-ups in front of his doctor, just a few days after being shot.
The anecdote leaves little doubt that Petraeus is tough and driven. He was born in 1952 to Dutch American parents – his father, Sextus, was a seaman – and he grew up in the upstate New York town of Cornwall. It lies almost in the shadow of West Point, America’s military academy, where Petraeus duly gained admission. He excelled at high school and then graduated in the top 5 per cent of the West Point class of 1974. He also married the superintendent’s daughter. From there he carved out a successful career culminating in the rank of general.
A reputation as a ‘Washington general’ was wiped out by two tours of duty in Iraq. First he led his unit in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and then won plaudits for pacifying the northern city of Mosul in 2004. Then he took charge of the retraining and rebuilding of Iraq’s army, again winning praise for swiftly and decisively bringing on the scheme. He then co-authored the military’s new manual of counter-insurgency before, at the start of 2007, being appointed to command US forces in Iraq.
‘He’s a straight talker and he’s very highly thought of militarily,’ said Professor Donald Goldstein, a military expert at the University of Pittsburgh. Petraeus fits a lot of energy and focus into his 5ft 9in frame. He is famed for his five-mile runs, carried out even on Baghdad’s hottest days. One subordinate called him the ‘most competitive man on earth’. But his macho army bluster is also tempered by a keen intellect. His Princeton PhD is no accident. He is flexible too: he knows the war in Iraq is rarely just about bombs and bullets. In Mosul, one of his most famous catchphrases on the subject of bringing peace to the city was ‘money is ammunition’.
Yet he is not without critics. Some say he is overly fond of the media and has skilfully crafted an almost flawless public persona of the skilled tactician. Others say his focus is not just about the facts on the ground, but about his own advancement. ‘He is a sycophant incarnate. He’s a smart guy, but he’s playing politics in this,’ said Larry Johnson, a former CIA anti-terrorism official. They also point out that Petraeus’s record in Iraq can be criticized. The peace he brought to Mosul proved shortlived, and there is now a criminal investigation into missing supplies and weapons that involves officials close to Petraeus. His time in Iraq has seen the emergence of death squads and heightened sectarianism. ‘This has all happened on his watch,’ said Johnson.
But what will his report say? First, some media spin needs to be cut through. Petraeus has been used as an impressive, patriotic figure on which to hang such an important study. That suits both the White House and Petraeus himself. But his tough persona masks a more nuanced approach from the administration.
In fact, the Petraeus report will be a mix of analyzes from Petraeus and the US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker. Its exact wording will have heavy influence from White House officials. For those hoping that the report will contain a damning indictment of the war or prompt any meaningful troop reduction – or full withdrawal – there is almost certain to be deep disappointment. ‘It is frankly delusional for anyone to think it is going to change policy,’ said Charles Pena, a senior fellow at think-tank the Independent Institute. ‘They [Petraeus and Crocker] have no choice but to try to implement administration policy.’
And that policy is showing some signs of success. The military surge of troop numbers pushed by Bush has had an impact. The report will probably point to success stories in former hotbeds of Sunni insurgency such as Ramadi, Tal Afar and Mosul, where the security situation has been brought under some degree of control. In these areas, strategic alliances with Sunni tribes have seen former insurgents working with the US against Islamic jihadists. ‘There has been progress militarily. It is fair to say that,’ said Professor Rick Stoll, a defence and warfare expert at Rice University.
A taste of what Petraeus’s presentation might look like has already been given. On a recent trip by Democrat and Republican politicians to Iraq, he sat down, armed with charts and Powerpoint slides, to illustrate the advances made by the surge. An account of the meeting by Democrat Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky gives the lie to anyone expecting a military withdrawal from Iraq. She revealed to one newspaper that Petraeus told her America would be in Iraq in some way ‘for nine to 10 years’.
While the surge has changed the nature of the conflict, it has not yet brought it much closer to an end. As the brutal Sunni insurgency has tailed off, it has been replaced by Shia violence. The report is likely to note that the war has now become a fight between Shia militant groups and the US military. By last July, according to US officials, Shia fighters accounted for 73 per cent of attacks on coalition forces. That has been matched by a total failure of the Iraqi political process and a collapse of relations between the majority Shia – represented by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki – and the US. The surge’s aim was to ‘buy time’ for reconciliation between Iraq’s warring sectarian factions, but instead the feuding blocs have grown more violently apart. ‘No one wants to talk about reconciliation. No one wants to listen,’ said one official recently returned from Iraq. ‘The only reconciliation that is taking place is between the US military and some Sunni insurgents. That is not going to solve Iraq’s problems in the long run.’
So that will be the twin messages of Petraeus and Crocker. The military aspect of the surge is starting to turn the tide. But the political opportunity it was designed to create is being wasted by the Iraqis. If that sounds familiar, that is because it is the official White House stance on Iraq. ‘He is going to say that, from a military standpoint, it is going well, but, from a political standpoint, it is difficult and the Iraqis have to stand up for themselves. That is what Bush says,’ said Goldstein.
But if the contents of the report appear predictable, its impact is harder to ascertain. One thing is clear: it is unlikely to precipitate any rush significantly to withdraw US forces. It will allow the White House to claim that its strategy is working and that to halt the surge – as most Democrats wish to do – would be to snatch victory away from their troops.
Most experts believe that the White House will keep US troop levels at the current force of about 160,000 until at least April. Then to maintain the surge the army would need to extend its current rotation period from 15 months to 18 months. That is seen as too much of a burden by many military leaders.
Therefore it is widely predicted that the US presence in Iraq could be down to pre-surge levels of 130,000 troops by September next year. That could be presented as the beginning of a withdrawal, but it is hardly the sort of conflict-ending momentum that many Democrats – and much of the American public – seem to want. However, there is little political pressure on Bush to change policy in Iraq. He does not face re-election and the Democrats have shown that they are unwilling to do the one thing that could end the war: cut off funding. Again, the Petraeus report will not provide them with motivation to harden their stance. ‘The President has called the Democrats’ bluff. They don’t have the stomach for defunding, so there is no political pressure on the White House,’ said Pena.
But that is not true for any of the presidential candidates. They are all feeling the heat. For the Democrats, the Petraeus report is likely to contain enough bad news for them to continue their largely symbolic push for a troop withdrawal, but it will also have the risk that they will look as if they are undermining the first signs of success on the ground. For Republicans, it poses the opposite problem. The top-tier candidates, such as Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, have seen what happened to the campaign of John McCain, the most vocal supporter of Bush’s surge policy: his support has almost collapsed. Yet the Petraeus report is likely to force them to toe the White House line more tightly and in the face of much public hostility. Or it could cause them to go against the White House, following a pro-withdrawal line and opening up huge splits in the party itself. Those chasms are already becoming evident, with some top Republican figures, such as Senator John Warner, already calling for troop withdrawals to begin this year.
But above all the political squabbling will be Bush. No matter what happens, he will be President for all of 2008. And he shows no sign of any significant change of tack. Despite being billed as a watershed moment, the only real prospect of a reversal of Iraq policy will come in January 2009, when a new President walks into the Oval Office. The brutal fact is that there remains no meaningful end in sight for the US involvement in Iraq. Vietnam proved that the difference between when a war becomes unpopular and when it ends can be many years. In July 1967, the public approval rating of the Vietnam war dropped forever below 50 per cent, yet America did not leave Vietnam totally until 1975.
A similar process could be repeating itself in Iraq. Petraeus – as a keen student of history – would probably privately think that a tragedy. In his PhD thesis 20 years ago, he wrote: ‘Vietnam was a painful reminder for the military that they, not the transient occupants of high office, generally bear the heaviest burden during armed conflict.’
That is a trenchant analysis. But it was written by the Petraeus of Princeton. The Petraeus of next month is a general playing the highest political stakes of his career in front of the eyes of the world. He is unlikely to be so candid again.
Iraq benchmarks
Iraq has failed to meet all but three of 18 congressionally mandated benchmarks for political and military progress, according to a draft of a Government Accountability Office report to be presented to Congress on Tuesday.
Achieved: The protection of the rights of minority political parties in the Iraqi legislature. It is the only one of eight political benchmarks to have been met, the report says. However, the report does not concern itself with attacks on these parties outside of the legislature.
Failed: In other areas, the political process is judged to have been a failure, including the continued non-passage of legislation on constitutional reform, new oil laws and de-Baathification. Observers say the parliament rarely has sufficient members in attendance to have a quorum to consider legislation.
Mixed progress: On the security front, Iraq has met on two benchmarks. Despite the surge, violence remains roughly at the same levels. However, the number of Iraqi army units capable of operating independently has dropped from 10 in March to six last month.
America is Braced for the General’s Verdict
Two decades ago, General David Petraeus, the man charged with winning America’s second war in Iraq, wrote a thesis for his PhD in international relations at Princeton.
Its 328 pages were an intense study of the legacies of a war that had stretched the US military, riven world opinion and deeply divided American political life. It was entitled The American Military and the Lessons of Vietnam. In one passage, the young officer took on the idea that public opinion in the US could not abide a military quagmire. ‘Vietnam was an extremely painful reminder that, when it comes to intervention, time and patience are not American virtues in abundant supply,’ Petraeus wrote in 1987. Now Petraeus is delivering another survey of an unpopular, divisive war. Only this time his audience is not a college tutor: it is the whole world.
In less than two weeks, Petraeus will appear before the US Congress and deliver a report into the progress of the ‘surge’, the military strategy launched by President George W Bush that was designed to win the Iraq war. It has been billed as a ‘make or break’ moment that could either trigger the beginnings of an American withdrawal or build on the first signs of real military success. And it will be scoured anxiously in London, where the political debate about the timing of a withdrawal of the remaining British forces is gathering pace.
In America, both sides of the political divide are breathless in anticipation. The Democrats await any hint of criticism. The Republicans have prepared a PR barrage of ‘good news’ to try to turn public opinion back behind the war effort. White House officials hail Petraeus as a ‘warrior scholar’ who finally gets what is needed to win in Iraq. They see him as a man who can save the Bush presidency.
But the reality is far more complex. The brutal truth is that the Petraeus report is unlikely to change a thing when it comes to policy on the ground: the surge and the war will go on. Its true importance lies in how it will be used politically: by the White House, by leading Democrats such as Senator Hillary Clinton, by Republican presidential hopefuls such as Rudy Giuliani.
And not least by Petraeus himself. For the highly media-savvy general has political ambitions of his own. This is his moment to shine.
A story often told about General David Howell Petraeus concerns a brush with death at Kentucky’s Fort Campbell in 1991. During a training exercise, a soldier tripped and accidentally fired his rifle. The bullet hit Petraeus in the chest. Yet he refused to leave the exercise, only relenting when a more senior general ordered him carried away on a stretcher. Even then – with the bullet missing his heart by inches – he managed to get himself discharged early from hospital after he did 50 push-ups in front of his doctor, just a few days after being shot.
The anecdote leaves little doubt that Petraeus is tough and driven. He was born in 1952 to Dutch American parents – his father, Sextus, was a seaman – and he grew up in the upstate New York town of Cornwall. It lies almost in the shadow of West Point, America’s military academy, where Petraeus duly gained admission. He excelled at high school and then graduated in the top 5 per cent of the West Point class of 1974. He also married the superintendent’s daughter. From there he carved out a successful career culminating in the rank of general.
A reputation as a ‘Washington general’ was wiped out by two tours of duty in Iraq. First he led his unit in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and then won plaudits for pacifying the northern city of Mosul in 2004. Then he took charge of the retraining and rebuilding of Iraq’s army, again winning praise for swiftly and decisively bringing on the scheme. He then co-authored the military’s new manual of counter-insurgency before, at the start of 2007, being appointed to command US forces in Iraq.
‘He’s a straight talker and he’s very highly thought of militarily,’ said Professor Donald Goldstein, a military expert at the University of Pittsburgh. Petraeus fits a lot of energy and focus into his 5ft 9in frame. He is famed for his five-mile runs, carried out even on Baghdad’s hottest days. One subordinate called him the ‘most competitive man on earth’. But his macho army bluster is also tempered by a keen intellect. His Princeton PhD is no accident. He is flexible too: he knows the war in Iraq is rarely just about bombs and bullets. In Mosul, one of his most famous catchphrases on the subject of bringing peace to the city was ‘money is ammunition’.
Yet he is not without critics. Some say he is overly fond of the media and has skilfully crafted an almost flawless public persona of the skilled tactician. Others say his focus is not just about the facts on the ground, but about his own advancement. ‘He is a sycophant incarnate. He’s a smart guy, but he’s playing politics in this,’ said Larry Johnson, a former CIA anti-terrorism official. They also point out that Petraeus’s record in Iraq can be criticized. The peace he brought to Mosul proved shortlived, and there is now a criminal investigation into missing supplies and weapons that involves officials close to Petraeus. His time in Iraq has seen the emergence of death squads and heightened sectarianism. ‘This has all happened on his watch,’ said Johnson.
But what will his report say? First, some media spin needs to be cut through. Petraeus has been used as an impressive, patriotic figure on which to hang such an important study. That suits both the White House and Petraeus himself. But his tough persona masks a more nuanced approach from the administration.
In fact, the Petraeus report will be a mix of analyzes from Petraeus and the US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker. Its exact wording will have heavy influence from White House officials. For those hoping that the report will contain a damning indictment of the war or prompt any meaningful troop reduction – or full withdrawal – there is almost certain to be deep disappointment. ‘It is frankly delusional for anyone to think it is going to change policy,’ said Charles Pena, a senior fellow at think-tank the Independent Institute. ‘They [Petraeus and Crocker] have no choice but to try to implement administration policy.’
And that policy is showing some signs of success. The military surge of troop numbers pushed by Bush has had an impact. The report will probably point to success stories in former hotbeds of Sunni insurgency such as Ramadi, Tal Afar and Mosul, where the security situation has been brought under some degree of control. In these areas, strategic alliances with Sunni tribes have seen former insurgents working with the US against Islamic jihadists. ‘There has been progress militarily. It is fair to say that,’ said Professor Rick Stoll, a defence and warfare expert at Rice University.
A taste of what Petraeus’s presentation might look like has already been given. On a recent trip by Democrat and Republican politicians to Iraq, he sat down, armed with charts and Powerpoint slides, to illustrate the advances made by the surge. An account of the meeting by Democrat Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky gives the lie to anyone expecting a military withdrawal from Iraq. She revealed to one newspaper that Petraeus told her America would be in Iraq in some way ‘for nine to 10 years’.
While the surge has changed the nature of the conflict, it has not yet brought it much closer to an end. As the brutal Sunni insurgency has tailed off, it has been replaced by Shia violence. The report is likely to note that the war has now become a fight between Shia militant groups and the US military. By last July, according to US officials, Shia fighters accounted for 73 per cent of attacks on coalition forces. That has been matched by a total failure of the Iraqi political process and a collapse of relations between the majority Shia – represented by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki – and the US. The surge’s aim was to ‘buy time’ for reconciliation between Iraq’s warring sectarian factions, but instead the feuding blocs have grown more violently apart. ‘No one wants to talk about reconciliation. No one wants to listen,’ said one official recently returned from Iraq. ‘The only reconciliation that is taking place is between the US military and some Sunni insurgents. That is not going to solve Iraq’s problems in the long run.’
So that will be the twin messages of Petraeus and Crocker. The military aspect of the surge is starting to turn the tide. But the political opportunity it was designed to create is being wasted by the Iraqis. If that sounds familiar, that is because it is the official White House stance on Iraq. ‘He is going to say that, from a military standpoint, it is going well, but, from a political standpoint, it is difficult and the Iraqis have to stand up for themselves. That is what Bush says,’ said Goldstein.
But if the contents of the report appear predictable, its impact is harder to ascertain. One thing is clear: it is unlikely to precipitate any rush significantly to withdraw US forces. It will allow the White House to claim that its strategy is working and that to halt the surge – as most Democrats wish to do – would be to snatch victory away from their troops.
Most experts believe that the White House will keep US troop levels at the current force of about 160,000 until at least April. Then to maintain the surge the army would need to extend its current rotation period from 15 months to 18 months. That is seen as too much of a burden by many military leaders.
Therefore it is widely predicted that the US presence in Iraq could be down to pre-surge levels of 130,000 troops by September next year. That could be presented as the beginning of a withdrawal, but it is hardly the sort of conflict-ending momentum that many Democrats – and much of the American public – seem to want. However, there is little political pressure on Bush to change policy in Iraq. He does not face re-election and the Democrats have shown that they are unwilling to do the one thing that could end the war: cut off funding. Again, the Petraeus report will not provide them with motivation to harden their stance. ‘The President has called the Democrats’ bluff. They don’t have the stomach for defunding, so there is no political pressure on the White House,’ said Pena.
But that is not true for any of the presidential candidates. They are all feeling the heat. For the Democrats, the Petraeus report is likely to contain enough bad news for them to continue their largely symbolic push for a troop withdrawal, but it will also have the risk that they will look as if they are undermining the first signs of success on the ground. For Republicans, it poses the opposite problem. The top-tier candidates, such as Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, have seen what happened to the campaign of John McCain, the most vocal supporter of Bush’s surge policy: his support has almost collapsed. Yet the Petraeus report is likely to force them to toe the White House line more tightly and in the face of much public hostility. Or it could cause them to go against the White House, following a pro-withdrawal line and opening up huge splits in the party itself. Those chasms are already becoming evident, with some top Republican figures, such as Senator John Warner, already calling for troop withdrawals to begin this year.
But above all the political squabbling will be Bush. No matter what happens, he will be President for all of 2008. And he shows no sign of any significant change of tack. Despite being billed as a watershed moment, the only real prospect of a reversal of Iraq policy will come in January 2009, when a new President walks into the Oval Office. The brutal fact is that there remains no meaningful end in sight for the US involvement in Iraq. Vietnam proved that the difference between when a war becomes unpopular and when it ends can be many years. In July 1967, the public approval rating of the Vietnam war dropped forever below 50 per cent, yet America did not leave Vietnam totally until 1975.
A similar process could be repeating itself in Iraq. Petraeus – as a keen student of history – would probably privately think that a tragedy. In his PhD thesis 20 years ago, he wrote: ‘Vietnam was a painful reminder for the military that they, not the transient occupants of high office, generally bear the heaviest burden during armed conflict.’
That is a trenchant analysis. But it was written by the Petraeus of Princeton. The Petraeus of next month is a general playing the highest political stakes of his career in front of the eyes of the world. He is unlikely to be so candid again.
Iraq benchmarks
Iraq has failed to meet all but three of 18 congressionally mandated benchmarks for political and military progress, according to a draft of a Government Accountability Office report to be presented to Congress on Tuesday.
Achieved: The protection of the rights of minority political parties in the Iraqi legislature. It is the only one of eight political benchmarks to have been met, the report says. However, the report does not concern itself with attacks on these parties outside of the legislature.
Failed: In other areas, the political process is judged to have been a failure, including the continued non-passage of legislation on constitutional reform, new oil laws and de-Baathification. Observers say the parliament rarely has sufficient members in attendance to have a quorum to consider legislation.
Mixed progress: On the security front, Iraq has met on two benchmarks. Despite the surge, violence remains roughly at the same levels. However, the number of Iraqi army units capable of operating independently has dropped from 10 in March to six last month.
America is Braced for the General’s Verdict
Two decades ago, General David Petraeus, the man charged with winning America’s second war in Iraq, wrote a thesis for his PhD in international relations at Princeton.
Its 328 pages were an intense study of the legacies of a war that had stretched the US military, riven world opinion and deeply divided American political life. It was entitled The American Military and the Lessons of Vietnam. In one passage, the young officer took on the idea that public opinion in the US could not abide a military quagmire. ‘Vietnam was an extremely painful reminder that, when it comes to intervention, time and patience are not American virtues in abundant supply,’ Petraeus wrote in 1987. Now Petraeus is delivering another survey of an unpopular, divisive war. Only this time his audience is not a college tutor: it is the whole world.
In less than two weeks, Petraeus will appear before the US Congress and deliver a report into the progress of the ‘surge’, the military strategy launched by President George W Bush that was designed to win the Iraq war. It has been billed as a ‘make or break’ moment that could either trigger the beginnings of an American withdrawal or build on the first signs of real military success. And it will be scoured anxiously in London, where the political debate about the timing of a withdrawal of the remaining British forces is gathering pace.
In America, both sides of the political divide are breathless in anticipation. The Democrats await any hint of criticism. The Republicans have prepared a PR barrage of ‘good news’ to try to turn public opinion back behind the war effort. White House officials hail Petraeus as a ‘warrior scholar’ who finally gets what is needed to win in Iraq. They see him as a man who can save the Bush presidency.
But the reality is far more complex. The brutal truth is that the Petraeus report is unlikely to change a thing when it comes to policy on the ground: the surge and the war will go on. Its true importance lies in how it will be used politically: by the White House, by leading Democrats such as Senator Hillary Clinton, by Republican presidential hopefuls such as Rudy Giuliani.
And not least by Petraeus himself. For the highly media-savvy general has political ambitions of his own. This is his moment to shine.
A story often told about General David Howell Petraeus concerns a brush with death at Kentucky’s Fort Campbell in 1991. During a training exercise, a soldier tripped and accidentally fired his rifle. The bullet hit Petraeus in the chest. Yet he refused to leave the exercise, only relenting when a more senior general ordered him carried away on a stretcher. Even then – with the bullet missing his heart by inches – he managed to get himself discharged early from hospital after he did 50 push-ups in front of his doctor, just a few days after being shot.
The anecdote leaves little doubt that Petraeus is tough and driven. He was born in 1952 to Dutch American parents – his father, Sextus, was a seaman – and he grew up in the upstate New York town of Cornwall. It lies almost in the shadow of West Point, America’s military academy, where Petraeus duly gained admission. He excelled at high school and then graduated in the top 5 per cent of the West Point class of 1974. He also married the superintendent’s daughter. From there he carved out a successful career culminating in the rank of general.
A reputation as a ‘Washington general’ was wiped out by two tours of duty in Iraq. First he led his unit in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and then won plaudits for pacifying the northern city of Mosul in 2004. Then he took charge of the retraining and rebuilding of Iraq’s army, again winning praise for swiftly and decisively bringing on the scheme. He then co-authored the military’s new manual of counter-insurgency before, at the start of 2007, being appointed to command US forces in Iraq.
‘He’s a straight talker and he’s very highly thought of militarily,’ said Professor Donald Goldstein, a military expert at the University of Pittsburgh. Petraeus fits a lot of energy and focus into his 5ft 9in frame. He is famed for his five-mile runs, carried out even on Baghdad’s hottest days. One subordinate called him the ‘most competitive man on earth’. But his macho army bluster is also tempered by a keen intellect. His Princeton PhD is no accident. He is flexible too: he knows the war in Iraq is rarely just about bombs and bullets. In Mosul, one of his most famous catchphrases on the subject of bringing peace to the city was ‘money is ammunition’.
Yet he is not without critics. Some say he is overly fond of the media and has skilfully crafted an almost flawless public persona of the skilled tactician. Others say his focus is not just about the facts on the ground, but about his own advancement. ‘He is a sycophant incarnate. He’s a smart guy, but he’s playing politics in this,’ said Larry Johnson, a former CIA anti-terrorism official. They also point out that Petraeus’s record in Iraq can be criticized. The peace he brought to Mosul proved shortlived, and there is now a criminal investigation into missing supplies and weapons that involves officials close to Petraeus. His time in Iraq has seen the emergence of death squads and heightened sectarianism. ‘This has all happened on his watch,’ said Johnson.
But what will his report say? First, some media spin needs to be cut through. Petraeus has been used as an impressive, patriotic figure on which to hang such an important study. That suits both the White House and Petraeus himself. But his tough persona masks a more nuanced approach from the administration.
In fact, the Petraeus report will be a mix of analyzes from Petraeus and the US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker. Its exact wording will have heavy influence from White House officials. For those hoping that the report will contain a damning indictment of the war or prompt any meaningful troop reduction – or full withdrawal – there is almost certain to be deep disappointment. ‘It is frankly delusional for anyone to think it is going to change policy,’ said Charles Pena, a senior fellow at think-tank the Independent Institute. ‘They [Petraeus and Crocker] have no choice but to try to implement administration policy.’
And that policy is showing some signs of success. The military surge of troop numbers pushed by Bush has had an impact. The report will probably point to success stories in former hotbeds of Sunni insurgency such as Ramadi, Tal Afar and Mosul, where the security situation has been brought under some degree of control. In these areas, strategic alliances with Sunni tribes have seen former insurgents working with the US against Islamic jihadists. ‘There has been progress militarily. It is fair to say that,’ said Professor Rick Stoll, a defence and warfare expert at Rice University.
A taste of what Petraeus’s presentation might look like has already been given. On a recent trip by Democrat and Republican politicians to Iraq, he sat down, armed with charts and Powerpoint slides, to illustrate the advances made by the surge. An account of the meeting by Democrat Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky gives the lie to anyone expecting a military withdrawal from Iraq. She revealed to one newspaper that Petraeus told her America would be in Iraq in some way ‘for nine to 10 years’.
While the surge has changed the nature of the conflict, it has not yet brought it much closer to an end. As the brutal Sunni insurgency has tailed off, it has been replaced by Shia violence. The report is likely to note that the war has now become a fight between Shia militant groups and the US military. By last July, according to US officials, Shia fighters accounted for 73 per cent of attacks on coalition forces. That has been matched by a total failure of the Iraqi political process and a collapse of relations between the majority Shia – represented by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki – and the US. The surge’s aim was to ‘buy time’ for reconciliation between Iraq’s warring sectarian factions, but instead the feuding blocs have grown more violently apart. ‘No one wants to talk about reconciliation. No one wants to listen,’ said one official recently returned from Iraq. ‘The only reconciliation that is taking place is between the US military and some Sunni insurgents. That is not going to solve Iraq’s problems in the long run.’
So that will be the twin messages of Petraeus and Crocker. The military aspect of the surge is starting to turn the tide. But the political opportunity it was designed to create is being wasted by the Iraqis. If that sounds familiar, that is because it is the official White House stance on Iraq. ‘He is going to say that, from a military standpoint, it is going well, but, from a political standpoint, it is difficult and the Iraqis have to stand up for themselves. That is what Bush says,’ said Goldstein.
But if the contents of the report appear predictable, its impact is harder to ascertain. One thing is clear: it is unlikely to precipitate any rush significantly to withdraw US forces. It will allow the White House to claim that its strategy is working and that to halt the surge – as most Democrats wish to do – would be to snatch victory away from their troops.
Most experts believe that the White House will keep US troop levels at the current force of about 160,000 until at least April. Then to maintain the surge the army would need to extend its current rotation period from 15 months to 18 months. That is seen as too much of a burden by many military leaders.
Therefore it is widely predicted that the US presence in Iraq could be down to pre-surge levels of 130,000 troops by September next year. That could be presented as the beginning of a withdrawal, but it is hardly the sort of conflict-ending momentum that many Democrats – and much of the American public – seem to want. However, there is little political pressure on Bush to change policy in Iraq. He does not face re-election and the Democrats have shown that they are unwilling to do the one thing that could end the war: cut off funding. Again, the Petraeus report will not provide them with motivation to harden their stance. ‘The President has called the Democrats’ bluff. They don’t have the stomach for defunding, so there is no political pressure on the White House,’ said Pena.
But that is not true for any of the presidential candidates. They are all feeling the heat. For the Democrats, the Petraeus report is likely to contain enough bad news for them to continue their largely symbolic push for a troop withdrawal, but it will also have the risk that they will look as if they are undermining the first signs of success on the ground. For Republicans, it poses the opposite problem. The top-tier candidates, such as Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, have seen what happened to the campaign of John McCain, the most vocal supporter of Bush’s surge policy: his support has almost collapsed. Yet the Petraeus report is likely to force them to toe the White House line more tightly and in the face of much public hostility. Or it could cause them to go against the White House, following a pro-withdrawal line and opening up huge splits in the party itself. Those chasms are already becoming evident, with some top Republican figures, such as Senator John Warner, already calling for troop withdrawals to begin this year.
But above all the political squabbling will be Bush. No matter what happens, he will be President for all of 2008. And he shows no sign of any significant change of tack. Despite being billed as a watershed moment, the only real prospect of a reversal of Iraq policy will come in January 2009, when a new President walks into the Oval Office. The brutal fact is that there remains no meaningful end in sight for the US involvement in Iraq. Vietnam proved that the difference between when a war becomes unpopular and when it ends can be many years. In July 1967, the public approval rating of the Vietnam war dropped forever below 50 per cent, yet America did not leave Vietnam totally until 1975.
A similar process could be repeating itself in Iraq. Petraeus – as a keen student of history – would probably privately think that a tragedy. In his PhD thesis 20 years ago, he wrote: ‘Vietnam was a painful reminder for the military that they, not the transient occupants of high office, generally bear the heaviest burden during armed conflict.’
That is a trenchant analysis. But it was written by the Petraeus of Princeton. The Petraeus of next month is a general playing the highest political stakes of his career in front of the eyes of the world. He is unlikely to be so candid again.
Iraq benchmarks
Iraq has failed to meet all but three of 18 congressionally mandated benchmarks for political and military progress, according to a draft of a Government Accountability Office report to be presented to Congress on Tuesday.
Achieved: The protection of the rights of minority political parties in the Iraqi legislature. It is the only one of eight political benchmarks to have been met, the report says. However, the report does not concern itself with attacks on these parties outside of the legislature.
Failed: In other areas, the political process is judged to have been a failure, including the continued non-passage of legislation on constitutional reform, new oil laws and de-Baathification. Observers say the parliament rarely has sufficient members in attendance to have a quorum to consider legislation.
Mixed progress: On the security front, Iraq has met on two benchmarks. Despite the surge, violence remains roughly at the same levels. However, the number of Iraqi army units capable of operating independently has dropped from 10 in March to six last month.
America is Braced for the General’s Verdict
Two decades ago, General David Petraeus, the man charged with winning America’s second war in Iraq, wrote a thesis for his PhD in international relations at Princeton.
Its 328 pages were an intense study of the legacies of a war that had stretched the US military, riven world opinion and deeply divided American political life. It was entitled The American Military and the Lessons of Vietnam. In one passage, the young officer took on the idea that public opinion in the US could not abide a military quagmire. ‘Vietnam was an extremely painful reminder that, when it comes to intervention, time and patience are not American virtues in abundant supply,’ Petraeus wrote in 1987. Now Petraeus is delivering another survey of an unpopular, divisive war. Only this time his audience is not a college tutor: it is the whole world.
In less than two weeks, Petraeus will appear before the US Congress and deliver a report into the progress of the ‘surge’, the military strategy launched by President George W Bush that was designed to win the Iraq war. It has been billed as a ‘make or break’ moment that could either trigger the beginnings of an American withdrawal or build on the first signs of real military success. And it will be scoured anxiously in London, where the political debate about the timing of a withdrawal of the remaining British forces is gathering pace.
In America, both sides of the political divide are breathless in anticipation. The Democrats await any hint of criticism. The Republicans have prepared a PR barrage of ‘good news’ to try to turn public opinion back behind the war effort. White House officials hail Petraeus as a ‘warrior scholar’ who finally gets what is needed to win in Iraq. They see him as a man who can save the Bush presidency.
But the reality is far more complex. The brutal truth is that the Petraeus report is unlikely to change a thing when it comes to policy on the ground: the surge and the war will go on. Its true importance lies in how it will be used politically: by the White House, by leading Democrats such as Senator Hillary Clinton, by Republican presidential hopefuls such as Rudy Giuliani.
And not least by Petraeus himself. For the highly media-savvy general has political ambitions of his own. This is his moment to shine.
A story often told about General David Howell Petraeus concerns a brush with death at Kentucky’s Fort Campbell in 1991. During a training exercise, a soldier tripped and accidentally fired his rifle. The bullet hit Petraeus in the chest. Yet he refused to leave the exercise, only relenting when a more senior general ordered him carried away on a stretcher. Even then – with the bullet missing his heart by inches – he managed to get himself discharged early from hospital after he did 50 push-ups in front of his doctor, just a few days after being shot.
The anecdote leaves little doubt that Petraeus is tough and driven. He was born in 1952 to Dutch American parents – his father, Sextus, was a seaman – and he grew up in the upstate New York town of Cornwall. It lies almost in the shadow of West Point, America’s military academy, where Petraeus duly gained admission. He excelled at high school and then graduated in the top 5 per cent of the West Point class of 1974. He also married the superintendent’s daughter. From there he carved out a successful career culminating in the rank of general.
A reputation as a ‘Washington general’ was wiped out by two tours of duty in Iraq. First he led his unit in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and then won plaudits for pacifying the northern city of Mosul in 2004. Then he took charge of the retraining and rebuilding of Iraq’s army, again winning praise for swiftly and decisively bringing on the scheme. He then co-authored the military’s new manual of counter-insurgency before, at the start of 2007, being appointed to command US forces in Iraq.
‘He’s a straight talker and he’s very highly thought of militarily,’ said Professor Donald Goldstein, a military expert at the University of Pittsburgh. Petraeus fits a lot of energy and focus into his 5ft 9in frame. He is famed for his five-mile runs, carried out even on Baghdad’s hottest days. One subordinate called him the ‘most competitive man on earth’. But his macho army bluster is also tempered by a keen intellect. His Princeton PhD is no accident. He is flexible too: he knows the war in Iraq is rarely just about bombs and bullets. In Mosul, one of his most famous catchphrases on the subject of bringing peace to the city was ‘money is ammunition’.
Yet he is not without critics. Some say he is overly fond of the media and has skilfully crafted an almost flawless public persona of the skilled tactician. Others say his focus is not just about the facts on the ground, but about his own advancement. ‘He is a sycophant incarnate. He’s a smart guy, but he’s playing politics in this,’ said Larry Johnson, a former CIA anti-terrorism official. They also point out that Petraeus’s record in Iraq can be criticized. The peace he brought to Mosul proved shortlived, and there is now a criminal investigation into missing supplies and weapons that involves officials close to Petraeus. His time in Iraq has seen the emergence of death squads and heightened sectarianism. ‘This has all happened on his watch,’ said Johnson.
But what will his report say? First, some media spin needs to be cut through. Petraeus has been used as an impressive, patriotic figure on which to hang such an important study. That suits both the White House and Petraeus himself. But his tough persona masks a more nuanced approach from the administration.
In fact, the Petraeus report will be a mix of analyzes from Petraeus and the US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker. Its exact wording will have heavy influence from White House officials. For those hoping that the report will contain a damning indictment of the war or prompt any meaningful troop reduction – or full withdrawal – there is almost certain to be deep disappointment. ‘It is frankly delusional for anyone to think it is going to change policy,’ said Charles Pena, a senior fellow at think-tank the Independent Institute. ‘They [Petraeus and Crocker] have no choice but to try to implement administration policy.’
And that policy is showing some signs of success. The military surge of troop numbers pushed by Bush has had an impact. The report will probably point to success stories in former hotbeds of Sunni insurgency such as Ramadi, Tal Afar and Mosul, where the security situation has been brought under some degree of control. In these areas, strategic alliances with Sunni tribes have seen former insurgents working with the US against Islamic jihadists. ‘There has been progress militarily. It is fair to say that,’ said Professor Rick Stoll, a defence and warfare expert at Rice University.
A taste of what Petraeus’s presentation might look like has already been given. On a recent trip by Democrat and Republican politicians to Iraq, he sat down, armed with charts and Powerpoint slides, to illustrate the advances made by the surge. An account of the meeting by Democrat Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky gives the lie to anyone expecting a military withdrawal from Iraq. She revealed to one newspaper that Petraeus told her America would be in Iraq in some way ‘for nine to 10 years’.
While the surge has changed the nature of the conflict, it has not yet brought it much closer to an end. As the brutal Sunni insurgency has tailed off, it has been replaced by Shia violence. The report is likely to note that the war has now become a fight between Shia militant groups and the US military. By last July, according to US officials, Shia fighters accounted for 73 per cent of attacks on coalition forces. That has been matched by a total failure of the Iraqi political process and a collapse of relations between the majority Shia – represented by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki – and the US. The surge’s aim was to ‘buy time’ for reconciliation between Iraq’s warring sectarian factions, but instead the feuding blocs have grown more violently apart. ‘No one wants to talk about reconciliation. No one wants to listen,’ said one official recently returned from Iraq. ‘The only reconciliation that is taking place is between the US military and some Sunni insurgents. That is not going to solve Iraq’s problems in the long run.’
So that will be the twin messages of Petraeus and Crocker. The military aspect of the surge is starting to turn the tide. But the political opportunity it was designed to create is being wasted by the Iraqis. If that sounds familiar, that is because it is the official White House stance on Iraq. ‘He is going to say that, from a military standpoint, it is going well, but, from a political standpoint, it is difficult and the Iraqis have to stand up for themselves. That is what Bush says,’ said Goldstein.
But if the contents of the report appear predictable, its impact is harder to ascertain. One thing is clear: it is unlikely to precipitate any rush significantly to withdraw US forces. It will allow the White House to claim that its strategy is working and that to halt the surge – as most Democrats wish to do – would be to snatch victory away from their troops.
Most experts believe that the White House will keep US troop levels at the current force of about 160,000 until at least April. Then to maintain the surge the army would need to extend its current rotation period from 15 months to 18 months. That is seen as too much of a burden by many military leaders.
Therefore it is widely predicted that the US presence in Iraq could be down to pre-surge levels of 130,000 troops by September next year. That could be presented as the beginning of a withdrawal, but it is hardly the sort of conflict-ending momentum that many Democrats – and much of the American public – seem to want. However, there is little political pressure on Bush to change policy in Iraq. He does not face re-election and the Democrats have shown that they are unwilling to do the one thing that could end the war: cut off funding. Again, the Petraeus report will not provide them with motivation to harden their stance. ‘The President has called the Democrats’ bluff. They don’t have the stomach for defunding, so there is no political pressure on the White House,’ said Pena.
But that is not true for any of the presidential candidates. They are all feeling the heat. For the Democrats, the Petraeus report is likely to contain enough bad news for them to continue their largely symbolic push for a troop withdrawal, but it will also have the risk that they will look as if they are undermining the first signs of success on the ground. For Republicans, it poses the opposite problem. The top-tier candidates, such as Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, have seen what happened to the campaign of John McCain, the most vocal supporter of Bush’s surge policy: his support has almost collapsed. Yet the Petraeus report is likely to force them to toe the White House line more tightly and in the face of much public hostility. Or it could cause them to go against the White House, following a pro-withdrawal line and opening up huge splits in the party itself. Those chasms are already becoming evident, with some top Republican figures, such as Senator John Warner, already calling for troop withdrawals to begin this year.
But above all the political squabbling will be Bush. No matter what happens, he will be President for all of 2008. And he shows no sign of any significant change of tack. Despite being billed as a watershed moment, the only real prospect of a reversal of Iraq policy will come in January 2009, when a new President walks into the Oval Office. The brutal fact is that there remains no meaningful end in sight for the US involvement in Iraq. Vietnam proved that the difference between when a war becomes unpopular and when it ends can be many years. In July 1967, the public approval rating of the Vietnam war dropped forever below 50 per cent, yet America did not leave Vietnam totally until 1975.
A similar process could be repeating itself in Iraq. Petraeus – as a keen student of history – would probably privately think that a tragedy. In his PhD thesis 20 years ago, he wrote: ‘Vietnam was a painful reminder for the military that they, not the transient occupants of high office, generally bear the heaviest burden during armed conflict.’
That is a trenchant analysis. But it was written by the Petraeus of Princeton. The Petraeus of next month is a general playing the highest political stakes of his career in front of the eyes of the world. He is unlikely to be so candid again.
Iraq benchmarks
Iraq has failed to meet all but three of 18 congressionally mandated benchmarks for political and military progress, according to a draft of a Government Accountability Office report to be presented to Congress on Tuesday.
Achieved: The protection of the rights of minority political parties in the Iraqi legislature. It is the only one of eight political benchmarks to have been met, the report says. However, the report does not concern itself with attacks on these parties outside of the legislature.
Failed: In other areas, the political process is judged to have been a failure, including the continued non-passage of legislation on constitutional reform, new oil laws and de-Baathification. Observers say the parliament rarely has sufficient members in attendance to have a quorum to consider legislation.
Mixed progress: On the security front, Iraq has met on two benchmarks. Despite the surge, violence remains roughly at the same levels. However, the number of Iraqi army units capable of operating independently has dropped from 10 in March to six last month.
America is Braced for the General’s Verdict
Two decades ago, General David Petraeus, the man charged with winning America’s second war in Iraq, wrote a thesis for his PhD in international relations at Princeton.
Its 328 pages were an intense study of the legacies of a war that had stretched the US military, riven world opinion and deeply divided American political life. It was entitled The American Military and the Lessons of Vietnam. In one passage, the young officer took on the idea that public opinion in the US could not abide a military quagmire. ‘Vietnam was an extremely painful reminder that, when it comes to intervention, time and patience are not American virtues in abundant supply,’ Petraeus wrote in 1987. Now Petraeus is delivering another survey of an unpopular, divisive war. Only this time his audience is not a college tutor: it is the whole world.
In less than two weeks, Petraeus will appear before the US Congress and deliver a report into the progress of the ‘surge’, the military strategy launched by President George W Bush that was designed to win the Iraq war. It has been billed as a ‘make or break’ moment that could either trigger the beginnings of an American withdrawal or build on the first signs of real military success. And it will be scoured anxiously in London, where the political debate about the timing of a withdrawal of the remaining British forces is gathering pace.
In America, both sides of the political divide are breathless in anticipation. The Democrats await any hint of criticism. The Republicans have prepared a PR barrage of ‘good news’ to try to turn public opinion back behind the war effort. White House officials hail Petraeus as a ‘warrior scholar’ who finally gets what is needed to win in Iraq. They see him as a man who can save the Bush presidency.
But the reality is far more complex. The brutal truth is that the Petraeus report is unlikely to change a thing when it comes to policy on the ground: the surge and the war will go on. Its true importance lies in how it will be used politically: by the White House, by leading Democrats such as Senator Hillary Clinton, by Republican presidential hopefuls such as Rudy Giuliani.
And not least by Petraeus himself. For the highly media-savvy general has political ambitions of his own. This is his moment to shine.
A story often told about General David Howell Petraeus concerns a brush with death at Kentucky’s Fort Campbell in 1991. During a training exercise, a soldier tripped and accidentally fired his rifle. The bullet hit Petraeus in the chest. Yet he refused to leave the exercise, only relenting when a more senior general ordered him carried away on a stretcher. Even then – with the bullet missing his heart by inches – he managed to get himself discharged early from hospital after he did 50 push-ups in front of his doctor, just a few days after being shot.
The anecdote leaves little doubt that Petraeus is tough and driven. He was born in 1952 to Dutch American parents – his father, Sextus, was a seaman – and he grew up in the upstate New York town of Cornwall. It lies almost in the shadow of West Point, America’s military academy, where Petraeus duly gained admission. He excelled at high school and then graduated in the top 5 per cent of the West Point class of 1974. He also married the superintendent’s daughter. From there he carved out a successful career culminating in the rank of general.
A reputation as a ‘Washington general’ was wiped out by two tours of duty in Iraq. First he led his unit in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and then won plaudits for pacifying the northern city of Mosul in 2004. Then he took charge of the retraining and rebuilding of Iraq’s army, again winning praise for swiftly and decisively bringing on the scheme. He then co-authored the military’s new manual of counter-insurgency before, at the start of 2007, being appointed to command US forces in Iraq.
‘He’s a straight talker and he’s very highly thought of militarily,’ said Professor Donald Goldstein, a military expert at the University of Pittsburgh. Petraeus fits a lot of energy and focus into his 5ft 9in frame. He is famed for his five-mile runs, carried out even on Baghdad’s hottest days. One subordinate called him the ‘most competitive man on earth’. But his macho army bluster is also tempered by a keen intellect. His Princeton PhD is no accident. He is flexible too: he knows the war in Iraq is rarely just about bombs and bullets. In Mosul, one of his most famous catchphrases on the subject of bringing peace to the city was ‘money is ammunition’.
Yet he is not without critics. Some say he is overly fond of the media and has skilfully crafted an almost flawless public persona of the skilled tactician. Others say his focus is not just about the facts on the ground, but about his own advancement. ‘He is a sycophant incarnate. He’s a smart guy, but he’s playing politics in this,’ said Larry Johnson, a former CIA anti-terrorism official. They also point out that Petraeus’s record in Iraq can be criticized. The peace he brought to Mosul proved shortlived, and there is now a criminal investigation into missing supplies and weapons that involves officials close to Petraeus. His time in Iraq has seen the emergence of death squads and heightened sectarianism. ‘This has all happened on his watch,’ said Johnson.
But what will his report say? First, some media spin needs to be cut through. Petraeus has been used as an impressive, patriotic figure on which to hang such an important study. That suits both the White House and Petraeus himself. But his tough persona masks a more nuanced approach from the administration.
In fact, the Petraeus report will be a mix of analyzes from Petraeus and the US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker. Its exact wording will have heavy influence from White House officials. For those hoping that the report will contain a damning indictment of the war or prompt any meaningful troop reduction – or full withdrawal – there is almost certain to be deep disappointment. ‘It is frankly delusional for anyone to think it is going to change policy,’ said Charles Pena, a senior fellow at think-tank the Independent Institute. ‘They [Petraeus and Crocker] have no choice but to try to implement administration policy.’
And that policy is showing some signs of success. The military surge of troop numbers pushed by Bush has had an impact. The report will probably point to success stories in former hotbeds of Sunni insurgency such as Ramadi, Tal Afar and Mosul, where the security situation has been brought under some degree of control. In these areas, strategic alliances with Sunni tribes have seen former insurgents working with the US against Islamic jihadists. ‘There has been progress militarily. It is fair to say that,’ said Professor Rick Stoll, a defence and warfare expert at Rice University.
A taste of what Petraeus’s presentation might look like has already been given. On a recent trip by Democrat and Republican politicians to Iraq, he sat down, armed with charts and Powerpoint slides, to illustrate the advances made by the surge. An account of the meeting by Democrat Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky gives the lie to anyone expecting a military withdrawal from Iraq. She revealed to one newspaper that Petraeus told her America would be in Iraq in some way ‘for nine to 10 years’.
While the surge has changed the nature of the conflict, it has not yet brought it much closer to an end. As the brutal Sunni insurgency has tailed off, it has been replaced by Shia violence. The report is likely to note that the war has now become a fight between Shia militant groups and the US military. By last July, according to US officials, Shia fighters accounted for 73 per cent of attacks on coalition forces. That has been matched by a total failure of the Iraqi political process and a collapse of relations between the majority Shia – represented by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki – and the US. The surge’s aim was to ‘buy time’ for reconciliation between Iraq’s warring sectarian factions, but instead the feuding blocs have grown more violently apart. ‘No one wants to talk about reconciliation. No one wants to listen,’ said one official recently returned from Iraq. ‘The only reconciliation that is taking place is between the US military and some Sunni insurgents. That is not going to solve Iraq’s problems in the long run.’
So that will be the twin messages of Petraeus and Crocker. The military aspect of the surge is starting to turn the tide. But the political opportunity it was designed to create is being wasted by the Iraqis. If that sounds familiar, that is because it is the official White House stance on Iraq. ‘He is going to say that, from a military standpoint, it is going well, but, from a political standpoint, it is difficult and the Iraqis have to stand up for themselves. That is what Bush says,’ said Goldstein.
But if the contents of the report appear predictable, its impact is harder to ascertain. One thing is clear: it is unlikely to precipitate any rush significantly to withdraw US forces. It will allow the White House to claim that its strategy is working and that to halt the surge – as most Democrats wish to do – would be to snatch victory away from their troops.
Most experts believe that the White House will keep US troop levels at the current force of about 160,000 until at least April. Then to maintain the surge the army would need to extend its current rotation period from 15 months to 18 months. That is seen as too much of a burden by many military leaders.
Therefore it is widely predicted that the US presence in Iraq could be down to pre-surge levels of 130,000 troops by September next year. That could be presented as the beginning of a withdrawal, but it is hardly the sort of conflict-ending momentum that many Democrats – and much of the American public – seem to want. However, there is little political pressure on Bush to change policy in Iraq. He does not face re-election and the Democrats have shown that they are unwilling to do the one thing that could end the war: cut off funding. Again, the Petraeus report will not provide them with motivation to harden their stance. ‘The President has called the Democrats’ bluff. They don’t have the stomach for defunding, so there is no political pressure on the White House,’ said Pena.
But that is not true for any of the presidential candidates. They are all feeling the heat. For the Democrats, the Petraeus report is likely to contain enough bad news for them to continue their largely symbolic push for a troop withdrawal, but it will also have the risk that they will look as if they are undermining the first signs of success on the ground. For Republicans, it poses the opposite problem. The top-tier candidates, such as Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, have seen what happened to the campaign of John McCain, the most vocal supporter of Bush’s surge policy: his support has almost collapsed. Yet the Petraeus report is likely to force them to toe the White House line more tightly and in the face of much public hostility. Or it could cause them to go against the White House, following a pro-withdrawal line and opening up huge splits in the party itself. Those chasms are already becoming evident, with some top Republican figures, such as Senator John Warner, already calling for troop withdrawals to begin this year.
But above all the political squabbling will be Bush. No matter what happens, he will be President for all of 2008. And he shows no sign of any significant change of tack. Despite being billed as a watershed moment, the only real prospect of a reversal of Iraq policy will come in January 2009, when a new President walks into the Oval Office. The brutal fact is that there remains no meaningful end in sight for the US involvement in Iraq. Vietnam proved that the difference between when a war becomes unpopular and when it ends can be many years. In July 1967, the public approval rating of the Vietnam war dropped forever below 50 per cent, yet America did not leave Vietnam totally until 1975.
A similar process could be repeating itself in Iraq. Petraeus – as a keen student of history – would probably privately think that a tragedy. In his PhD thesis 20 years ago, he wrote: ‘Vietnam was a painful reminder for the military that they, not the transient occupants of high office, generally bear the heaviest burden during armed conflict.’
That is a trenchant analysis. But it was written by the Petraeus of Princeton. The Petraeus of next month is a general playing the highest political stakes of his career in front of the eyes of the world. He is unlikely to be so candid again.
Iraq benchmarks
Iraq has failed to meet all but three of 18 congressionally mandated benchmarks for political and military progress, according to a draft of a Government Accountability Office report to be presented to Congress on Tuesday.
Achieved: The protection of the rights of minority political parties in the Iraqi legislature. It is the only one of eight political benchmarks to have been met, the report says. However, the report does not concern itself with attacks on these parties outside of the legislature.
Failed: In other areas, the political process is judged to have been a failure, including the continued non-passage of legislation on constitutional reform, new oil laws and de-Baathification. Observers say the parliament rarely has sufficient members in attendance to have a quorum to consider legislation.
Mixed progress: On the security front, Iraq has met on two benchmarks. Despite the surge, violence remains roughly at the same levels. However, the number of Iraqi army units capable of operating independently has dropped from 10 in March to six last month.
Categories
- 10000 Loan
- 10000 Personal Loan
- 10000 Scholarship
- 2000 Loan
- 2010 Government Grants
- 5000 Personal Loan
- A Personal Loan
- Adverse Credit Loans
- Aid For Single Mothers
- Alberta Small Business Loans
- Alternative Business Financing
- American Business Grants
- And Government Grants
- Application For Government Grant
- Applications For Government Grants
- Applications For Grants For College
- Apply For A Business Loan
- Apply For A Free Grant Online
- Apply For A Government Grant
- Apply For A Personal Loan
- Apply For Business Loan
- Apply For College Grants
- Apply For Free Government Grants
- Apply For Free Grants
- Apply For Free Grants For Women
- Apply For Free Grants Online
- Apply for Government Grants
- Apply For Grants
- Apply For Grants Online For Free
- Apply For Personal Loan
- Apply For Personal Loans
- Apply For Small Business Grant
- Apply For Small Business Grants
- Apply For Small Business Loan
- Apply Government Grant
- Apply Personal Loan
- Applying For A Business Loan
- Applying For A Government Grant
- Applying For Free Government Grants
- Applying For Free Grants
- Applying For Government Grants
- Are Grants Free Money
- Available Government Grants
- Available Grants
- Bad Business Credit Loan Small
- Bad Credit Business Loan
- Bad Credit Business Loans
- Bad Credit Loan
- Bad Credit Loans
- Bad Credit Personal Loan
- Bad Credit Personal Loan Lenders
- Bad Credit Personal Loans
- Bad Credit Small Business Loans
- Bad Loans
- Bad Personal Loan
- Bad Personal Loans
- Bank Business Loan
- Bank Business Loans
- Bank Loans Business
- Bank Loans For Business
- Bank Loans For Small Business
- Bank Small Business Loan
- Bank Small Business Loans
- Bankruptcy Personal Loan
- Bc Government Grants
- Best Business Loans
- Best Loans
- Best Personal Loan
- Best Personal Loans
- Best Small Business Loan
- Best Small Business Loans
- Black Business Grants
- Books On Government Grants
- Borrow Money
- Building Loans
- Buisness Grants
- Business Acquisition Financing
- Business Acquisition Loans
- Business And Loans
- Business Bank Loans
- Business Credit Cards
- Business Debt
- Business Development Loans
- Business Equipment Financing
- Business Equity Loans
- Business Expansion Grants
- Business Fast Loan Small
- Business Finance Loan
- Business Finance Loans
- Business Finance Small
- Business Financing
- Business Financing For Women
- Business Financing Options
- Business Financing Small
- Business Funding
- Business Funding For Woman
- Business Funding For Women
- Business Funding Grants
- Business Funding Sources
- Business Government Grant
- Business Government Grants
- Business Government Loan
- Business Grant
- Business Grant Available
- Business Grant Canada
- Business Grant Information
- Business Grant Loan
- Business Grant Money
- Business Grants Canada
- Business Grants Federal
- Business Grants For
- Business Grants For Minorities
- Business Grants For Women
- Business Grants Funding
- Business Grants Gov
- Business Grants Government
- Business Grants In Canada
- Business Grants Loans
- Business Grants Minority
- Business Grants Ontario
- Business Grants Uk
- Business Grants Women
- Business Lenders
- Business Line Of Credit
- Business Lines Of Credit
- Business Loan
- Business Loan Application
- Business Loan Applications
- Business Loan Bad Credit
- Business Loan Broker
- Business Loan Brokers
- Business Loan Calculator
- Business Loan For Women
- Business Loan Grant
- Business Loan Grants
- Business Loan Interest Rate
- Business Loan Interest Rates
- Business Loan New
- Business Loan Online Small
- Business Loan Quotes
- Business Loan Rate
- Business Loan Rates
- Business Loan Requirements
- Business Loan Small
- Business Loan Startup
- Business Loan Terms
- Business Loan Unsecured
- Business Loan With Bad Credit
- Business Loans And Grants
- Business Loans And Grants For Women
- Business Loans Bad Credit
- Business Loans Bank
- Business Loans Business
- Business Loans Calculator
- Business Loans Canada
- Business Loans Fast
- Business Loans Financing
- Business Loans For Bad Credit
- Business Loans For Small Business
- Business Loans For Veterans
- Business Loans For Women
- Business Loans Government
- Business Loans Government Grants
- Business Loans New
- Business Loans Online
- Business Loans Or Grants
- Business Loans Rates
- Business Loans Small
- Business Loans With Bad Credit
- Business Loans Women
- Business Plan Template
- Business Purchase Financing
- Business Start Grant
- Business Start Up
- Business Start Up Checklist
- Business Start Up Financing
- Business Start Up Funding
- Business Start Up Grant
- Business Start Up Loan
- Business Start Up Loans
- Business Starting Grants
- Business Startup
- Business Startup Funding
- Business Startup Grant
- Business Startup Grants
- Business Startup Loan
- Canada Federal Grants
- Canada Government Business Grants
- Canada Government Grant
- Canada Government Grants
- Canada Government Grants For Small Business
- Canada Government Loan
- Canada Government Loans
- Canada Government Small Business
- Canada Government Small Business Grants
- Canada Grants For Small Business
- Canada Grants Small Business
- Canada Small Business Grant
- Canada Small Business Grants
- Canada Small Business Loan
- Canada Student Loans And Grants
- Canadian Business Grants
- Canadian Business Loans
- Canadian Federal Grants
- Canadian Government Business
- Canadian Government Grant
- Canadian Government Grant Money
- Canadian Government Grants
- Canadian Government Grants For Students
- Canadian Government Grants Small Business
- Canadian Government Loan
- Canadian Government Loans
- Canadian Government Small Business
- Canadian Government Small Business Grants
- Canadian Government Small Business Loans
- Canadian Grants For Small Business
- Canadian Small Business Government Grants
- Canadian Small Business Grants
- Canadian Small Business Loan
- Capital One Personal Loans
- Car Grants
- Car Loan
- Car Loans
- Cash Advance Loans
- Cash Loans
- Cash Personal Loans
- Chances Of Getting A Scholarship
- Cheap Loans
- Cheapest Loans
- Christmas Loans
- Collateral Loans
- College Free Grants
- College Government Grant
- College Grant Application
- College Grant Loan
- College Grant Money
- College Grant Money For Women
- College Grants
- College Grants Canada
- College Grants For Free
- College Grants For Students
- College Grants For Women
- College Grants Free
- College Grants Loans
- College Loans
- College Loans For Students
- College Money For Women
- College Scholarships And Grants
- College Scholarships Grants
- College Student Grants
- Commercial Business Loan
- Commercial Business Loans
- Commercial Construction Loan
- Commercial Financing
- Commercial Grants
- Commercial Lenders
- Commercial Lending
- Commercial Loan
- Commercial Loan Rates
- Commercial Loans
- Commercial Real Estate Loans
- Company Grants
- Compare Personal Loans
- Construction Home Loans
- Construction Loan Calculator
- Construction Loan Lenders
- Construction Loan Mortgage
- Construction Loan Rates
- Credit Personal Loans
- Credit Union Personal Loans
- Current Mortgage Rates
- Debt Consolidation Grant
- Debt Consolidation Loans
- Debt Relief Grants
- Disability Grants
- Disabled Grants
- Easy Business Loans
- Easy Loan
- Easy Loans
- Easy Personal Loan
- Easy Personal Loans
- Easy Scholarships And Grants
- Easy Small Business Loan
- Education Grants For Women
- Educational Grants
- Educational Grants For Women
- Emergency Personal Loan
- Entrepreneur Grants
- Fair Credit Loans
- Fast Business Loan
- Fast Business Loans
- Fast Cash Loans
- Fast Cash Personal Loans
- Fast Loan
- Fast Loans
- Fast Personal Loan
- Fast Personal Loans
- Fast Small Business Loans
- Federal Business Grants
- Federal Government Business Grants
- Federal Government Grant Programs
- Federal Government Grants For Women
- Federal Government Loans
- Federal Government Small Business Grants
- Federal Government Small Business Loans
- Federal Grant
- Federal Grant For Small Business
- Federal Grant Money
- Federal Grant Money For College
- Federal Grant Programs
- Federal Grants Canada
- Federal Grants For College
- Federal Grants For Individuals
- Federal Grants For Small Business
- Federal Grants For Woman
- Federal Grants Small Business
- Federal Small Business Grants
- Federal Small Business Loans
- Federal Small Business Loans Grants Government
- Federal Student Grants
- Finance Companies
- Finance Loan
- Finance Loans
- Finance Small Business
- Financial Aid For Minorities
- Financial Aid For Small Business
- Financial Aid For Small Businesses
- Financial Aid Grants
- Financial Assistance For Small Businesses
- Financial Grants For Small Businesses
- Financial Help For Small Business
- Financial Help For Small Businesses
- Financing A Business
- Financing A New Business
- Financing A Small Business
- Financing Business
- Financing For Business
- Financing For Small Business
- Financing Small Business
- Financing Small Business Loan
- Financing The Small Business
- Finding Small Business Grants
- First Business Grant
- First Time Business Grants
- First Time Business Loan
- First Time Business Loans
- First Time Business Owner Grants
- First Time Home Buyer Grants
- First Time Home Buyers Government Grants
- First Time Loans
- For Single Mothers
- Franchise Financing
- Franchise Funding
- Franchise Loans
- Free Application For Government Grants
- Free Applications For Government Grants
- Free Business Funding
- Free Business Grant
- Free Business Grant Information
- Free Business Grants For Women
- Free Business Loans
- Free Business Money
- Free Canadian Government Grants
- Free Canadian Grants
- Free College Government Grants
- Free College Grant Money
- Free College Grants
- Free College Money
- Free College Scholarships
- Free Federal Grant Money
- Free Federal Grants
- Free Funding For College
- Free Gov Grants
- Free Gov Grants For Women
- Free Gov Money
- Free Goverment Grants.com
- Free Goverment Loans
- Free Government College Grants
- Free Government Funding
- Free Government Grant
- Free Government Grant Application
- Free Government Grant Info
- Free Government Grant Information
- Free Government Grant Money
- Free Government Grant Money For Individuals
- Free Government Grant Programs
- Free Government Grant Search
- Free Government Grants
- Free Government Grants And Money
- Free Government Grants Applications
- Free Government Grants For Businesses
- Free Government Grants For Cars
- Free Government Grants For College
- Free Government Grants For Men
- Free Government Grants For Single Moms
- Free Government Grants for Women
- Free Government Grants Money
- Free Government Grants Online
- Free Government Grants Women
- Free Government Home Grant
- Free Government Housing Grants
- Free Government Loans
- Free Government Money
- Free Government Money And Grants
- Free Government Money For Individuals
- Free Government Money For Students
- Free Government Money For Women
- Free Government Money Grants
- Free Grant Applications
- Free Grant From Government
- Free Grant From The Government
- Free Grant Loans
- Free Grant Money
- Free Grant Money For College
- Free Grant Money For Small Businesses
- Free Grant Money For Students
- Free Grant Money For Women
- Free Grant Money From Government
- Free Grant Money Search
- Free Grants
- Free Grants And Loans
- Free Grants And Scholarships
- Free Grants Canada
- Free Grants For College
- Free Grants For Individuals
- Free Grants For School
- Free Grants For Small Business
- Free Grants For Starting A Small Business
- Free Grants For Women
- Free Grants For Women In Business
- Free Grants From Canadian Government
- Free Grants From Government
- Free Grants From The Government
- Free House Grants
- Free Information Government Grants
- Free List Of Government Grants
- Free Loans
- Free Money And Grants
- Free Money For Bills
- Free Money For Businesses
- Free Money For College
- Free Money For Home
- Free Money For Individuals
- Free Money For School
- Free Money For Students
- Free Money From Gov
- Free Money From Government
- Free Money From Government Grant
- Free Money From Government Grants
- Free Money From The Gov
- Free Money From The Government
- Free Money From The Government For Women
- Free Money Government
- Free Money Government Grants
- Free Money Grant
- Free Money Grants
- Free Money Now
- Free Money Online
- Free Online Government Grants
- Free Scholarship Money
- Free Scholarships
- Free Scholarships And Grants
- Free School Grants
- Free Small Business Government Grants
- Free Small Business Grants
- Free Small Business Loan
- Free Small Business Loans
- Funding A Small Business
- Funding Business
- Funding For Business
- Funding For Businesses
- Funding For New Business
- Funding For Scholarships
- Funding For Small Business
- Funding For Small Businesses
- Funding Small Business
- Funding Small Businesses
- Funds For Starting A Small Business
- Get A Business Loan
- Get A Government Grant
- Get A Small Business Loan
- Get Business Loan
- Get Free Grant Money
- Get Government Grant
- Get Government Grants
- Get Loan
- Get Personal Loan
- Getting A Personal Loan
- Getting A Scholarship
- Getting A Small Business Loan
- Getting Government Grants
- Getting Small Business Loan
- Go Back To School Grants
- Gov Business Grants
- Gov Grant
- Gov Grants
- Gov Grants And Loans
- Gov Grants Canada
- Gov Grants For Small Business
- Gov Grants Small Business
- Gov Small Business Loans
- Govenment Grants
- Goverment Free Money
- Goverment Grant Gov
- Goverment Grant Org
- Goverment Grants Com
- Goverment Grants For Cars
- Goverment Grants For College
- Goverment Grants For Housing
- Goverment Grants For Solar Panels
- Goverment Grants Uk
- Goverment Homes For Sale
- Goverment Housing Grant
- Goverment Loans Small Business
- Goverment Small Business Loan
- Goverment Student Grants
- Government Aid For College
- Government And Grants
- Government Business Grant
- Government Business Grants And Loans
- Government Business Loan
- Government Business Loan And Grant
- Government Business Loans
- Government Business Loans For Women
- Government Business Loans Grants
- Government Canada Business Grants
- Government Canada Grants
- Government Car Grants
- Government College Grants
- Government College Grants For Women
- Government Computer Grants
- Government Disability Grants
- Government Education Grants
- Government Education Grants Canada
- Government Education Grants For Women
- Government Educational Grants
- Government Entrepreneur Grants
- Government Financial Help For Small Business
- Government Free Grants
- Government Free Money
- Government Free Money Grants
- Government Funded Grants
- Government Funding For Small Business
- Government Funding Grants
- Government Funds For Business
- Government Grant Applications
- Government Grant Business
- Government Grant For College
- Government Grant For First Time Home Buyers
- Government Grant For Home Improvement
- Government Grant For Home Renovations
- Government Grant For House
- Government Grant For New Small Business
- Government Grant For Starting A Small Business
- Government Grant Forms
- Government Grant Funding
- Government Grant Home
- Government Grant Home Loan
- Government Grant Housing
- Government Grant Money
- Government Grant Money For Small Business
- Government Grant Money For Women
- Government Grant Programs
- Government Grant Scholarship
- Government Grant To Start A Business
- Government Grant Writing
- Government Grants
- Government Grants 2009
- Government Grants And Loans
- Government Grants And Loans For Small Business
- Government Grants And Loans For Small Businesses
- Government Grants And Scholarships For College
- Government Grants Applications
- Government Grants Assistance
- Government Grants Available
- Government Grants Business
- Government Grants Business Start Up
- Government Grants Canada
- Government Grants College
- Government Grants Debt
- Government Grants Disabled
- Government Grants Education
- Government Grants For A Car
- Government Grants For Agriculture
- Government Grants For All
- Government Grants For Artists
- Government Grants For Automobiles
- Government Grants For Bills
- Government Grants For Business Women
- Government Grants For Businesses
- Government Grants For Cars
- Government Grants For Child Care
- Government Grants For Children
- Government Grants For Churches
- Government Grants For College
- Government Grants For College Students
- Government Grants For Continuing Education
- Government Grants For Courses
- Government Grants For Debt
- Government Grants For Debt Relief
- Government Grants For Disabled
- Government Grants For Disabled People
- Government Grants For Education
- Government Grants For Entrepreneurs
- Government Grants For Families
- Government Grants For Farming
- Government Grants For First Time Home Buyers
- Government Grants For First Time Home Buyers 2010
- Government Grants For First Time Home Buyers Down Payment
- Government Grants For First Time Home Buyers Ontario
- Government Grants For Free
- Government Grants For Free Money
- Government Grants For Going Green
- Government Grants For Home Buyers
- Government Grants For Home Improvements
- Government Grants For Home Loans
- Government Grants For Home Owners
- Government Grants For Home Renovations
- Government Grants For Home Repairs
- Government Grants For Homeowners
- Government Grants For House Buying
- Government Grants For Individuals
- Government Grants For Job Training
- Government Grants For Minorities
- Government Grants For Minority Women
- Government Grants For Mothers
- Government Grants For Musicians
- Government Grants For New Business
- Government Grants For New Businesses
- Government Grants For New Home Buyers
- Government Grants For New Windows
- Government Grants For Opening A Business
- Government Grants For Real Estate Investors
- Government Grants For Recycling Business
- Government Grants For Rent
- Government Grants For Restaurants
- Government Grants For Schooling
- Government Grants For Schools
- Government Grants For Senior Citizens
- Government Grants For Seniors
- Government Grants For Single Moms
- Government Grants For Single Mothers
- Government Grants For Single Mothers Obama
- Government Grants For Small Business Loans
- Government Grants For Small Business Owners
- Government Grants For Starting A Small Business
- Government Grants For Student
- Government Grants For Students
- Government Grants For Teachers
- Government Grants For The Elderly
- Government Grants For The Unemployed
- Government Grants For Trade Schools
- Government Grants For Trades
- Government Grants For Training Courses
- Government Grants For Tree Planting
- Government Grants For Women Business
- Government Grants For Women Canada
- Government Grants For Young Entrepreneurs
- Government Grants Free
- Government Grants Free Money
- Government Grants Home
- Government Grants Individuals
- Government Grants Information
- Government Grants Loans
- Government Grants New Business
- Government Grants Non Profit Organizations
- Government Grants Of Canada
- Government Grants Online
- Government Grants Programs
- Government Grants Scholarships
- Government Grants School
- Government Grants Senior Citizens
- Government Grants Single Moms
- Government Grants Single Mothers
- Government Grants Small Business
- Government Grants Small Business Start Up
- Government Grants Student
- Government Grants To Buy A Home
- Government Grants To Buy A House
- Government Grants To Go Back To School
- Government Grants To Small Business
- Government Grants To Small Businesses
- Government Grants To Start A Business
- Government Grants To Start A New Business
- Government Grants To Start A Small Business
- Government Grants To Start Business
- Government Grants To Start Small Business
- Government Grants To Women
- Government Grants Uk
- Government Grants Women
- Government Grants Women Business
- Government Grants Writers
- Government Grants Youth Programs
- Government Grants.ca
- Government Grants.org
- Government Home Grants
- Government Home Improvement Grants
- Government Housing Grant
- Government Housing Grants
- Government Loan For Business
- Government Loan For Minorities
- Government Loan For Small Business
- Government Loans
- Government Loans And Grants
- Government Loans And Grants For Small Business
- Government Loans Canada
- Government Loans For Business
- Government Loans For Small Business
- Government Loans For Women
- Government Loans Grants
- Government Loans Small Business
- Government Money For Free
- Government Money For Students
- Government Money Free
- Government Mortgage Grants
- Government New Business Grants
- Government Of Alberta Grants
- Government Of Canada Grant
- Government Of Canada Grants For Education
- Government Of Canada Grants For Home Renovations
- Government Of Canada Grants For Small Business
- Government Of Canada Small Business
- Government Of Canada Small Business Grants
- Government Pell Grants
- Government Personal Loans
- Government Real Estate Grants
- Government Retraining Grants
- Government Scholarships And Grants
- Government Scholarships For Moms
- Government School Grants
- Government School Grants For Single Mothers
- Government School Loans
- Government Schooling Grants
- Government Small Business
- Government Small Business Grant
- Government Small Business Grant Loan
- Government Small Business Grants For Women
- Government Small Business Loan
- Government Small Business Loan Grants
- Government Small Business Loans
- Government Stimulus Grants
- Government Student Grant
- Government Student Grants
- Government Training Grants
- Government Window Grants
- Government Women Business Grants
- Governmentgrants
- Governments Grants
- Govt Grants
- Grant And Loans
- Grant And Scholarships
- Grant And Scholarships For College
- Grant Applications
- Grant For
- Grant For New Businesses
- Grant For Single Mothers
- Grant For Small Business
- Grant For Woman Business
- Grant For Women Business
- Grant For Women Starting A Business
- Grant Free Money
- Grant From The Goverment
- Grant Funding For Women
- Grant Get
- Grant Money
- Grant Money Available For Women
- Grant Money For College
- Grant Money For College Women
- Grant Money For Free
- Grant Money For Minorities
- Grant Money For Moms
- Grant Money For Small Business
- Grant Money Free
- Grant Small Business
- Grant To Go Back To School
- Grant To Start A Business
- Grant.gov
- Grants
- Grants & Scholarships
- Grants & Scholarships For College
- Grants And College
- Grants And Financial Aid For College
- Grants And Government
- Grants And Loans
- Grants And Loans For Small Business
- Grants And Loans For Small Businesses
- Grants And Scholarships
- Grants Available
- Grants Business
- Grants Business Start
- Grants Businesses
- Grants Canada
- Grants Canada Small Business
- Grants Disability
- Grants Education
- Grants Federal
- Grants For
- Grants For Black Women
- Grants For Business Start Up
- Grants For Business Startup
- Grants For Business Women
- Grants For Businesses
- Grants For Canada
- Grants For Canadian Students
- Grants For Collage
- Grants For College
- Grants For College Students
- Grants For College Women
- Grants For Debt Consolidation
- Grants For Female Entrepreneurs
- Grants For Free Money
- Grants For Funding
- Grants For Government
- Grants For Home Improvements
- Grants For Housing
- Grants For Moms
- Grants For Mothers
- Grants For Mothers To Go Back To School
- Grants For New Business
- Grants For New Businesses
- Grants For New Small Business
- Grants For Scholarships
- Grants For Schools
- Grants For Single Moms
- Grants For Single Mother
- Grants For Single Mothers To Go Back To School
- Grants For Single Parents
- Grants For Small Business Owners
- Grants For Small Business Startup
- Grants For Solar Panels
- Grants For Starting A Business
- Grants For Students
- Grants For Women And Small Business
- Grants For Women Canada
- Grants For Women Entrepreneurs
- Grants For Women For College
- Grants For Women In Business
- Grants For Women In Canada
- Grants For Women Starting Business
- Grants For Women Starting Small Business
- Grants For You
- Grants Free
- Grants From The Government
- Grants Government
- Grants Government Of Canada
- Grants In Education
- Grants Loans
- Grants Moms
- Grants Mothers
- Grants New Business
- Grants Online
- Grants Or Funding
- Grants Or Scholarships
- Grants Scholarships For Women
- Grants Small Business
- Grants To Business
- Grants To Buy A Home
- Grants To Buy A House
- Grants To Pay Bills
- Grants To Pay Off Debt
- Grants To Start A Small Business
- Grants To Start Business
- Grants Woman Business
- Grants.gov
- Green Government Grants
- Guaranteed Business Loans
- Guaranteed Personal Loan
- Guaranteed Personal Loans
- Guaranteed Small Business Loans
- Guarantor Loans
- Halifax Loans
- Hard Money Business Loan
- Hard Money Lenders
- Heating Grants
- High Risk Business Loans
- High Risk Loans
- High Risk Personal Loan
- Home Based Business Grants
- Home Building Loans
- Home Business Grant
- Home Business Grants
- Home Equity Loan
- Home Grants
- Home Improvement Grants
- Home Improvement Loan
- Home Loan
- Home Loan Rates
- Home Loans
- Home Mortgage Rates
- Homeowner Loans
- Housing Grants
- Housing Grants Canada
- How Can I Apply For A Government Grant
- How Do I Apply For A Government Grant
- How Do I Get A Government Grant
- How To Apply For A Business Loan
- How To Apply For A Free Grant
- How To Apply For A Small Business Government Grant
- How To Apply For A Small Business Loan
- How To Apply For Grants For College
- How To Apply For Small Business Grants For Women
- How To Find Government Grants
- How To Find Grants For College
- How To Find Small Businesses
- How To Get Business Funding
- How To Get Free Government Grants
- How To Get Free Money From The Goverment
- How To Get Government Grant
- How To Get Grants
- How To Get Grants For A Business
- How To Make Free Money
- How To Obtain Government Grants
- I Need A Loan
- I Need A Personal Loan
- I Need Free Money
- Information On Government Grants
- Installment Loans
- Instant Approval Personal Loans
- Instant Loans
- Instant Personal Loan
- Instant Personal Loans
- International Business Loans
- Investment Loans
- Land Loans
- Large Business Loans
- Lenders
- Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN)
- Licensed Vocational Nurse (LVN)
- List Of Government Grants
- Loan Broker
- Loan Business
- Loan Companies
- Loan Company
- Loan Finance
- Loan For A Small Business
- Loan For Business
- Loan For Small Business
- Loan For Woman
- Loan Lenders
- Loan Personal
- Loan Sharks
- Loan Sharks Online
- Loan Small
- Loans
- Loans And Grants
- Loans And Grants For Small Business
- Loans Bad Credit
- Loans Business
- Loans Construction
- Loans Credit
- Loans Finance
- Loans For Bad Credit
- Loans For Business
- Loans For Business Women
- Loans For Businesses
- Loans For College
- Loans For College Students
- Loans For Free
- Loans For New Business
- Loans For People On Benefits
- Loans For People With Bad Credit
- Loans For Personal
- Loans For Single Moms
- Loans For Single Mothers
- Loans For Small Business
- Loans For Small Businesses
- Loans For The Unemployed
- Loans For Unemployed
- Loans For Women
- Loans For Women Business
- Loans Government
- Loans Grants
- Loans Online
- Loans People Bad Credit
- Loans Personal
- Loans Small Business
- Loans Small Businesses
- Loans To Small Business
- Loans To Start A Business
- Loans With Bad Credit
- Long Term Loans
- Long Term Personal Loans
- Look For Scholarship
- Looking For Business Loan
- Looking For Grants
- Low Apr Loans
- Low Income Government Grants
- Low Income Loans
- Low Interest Business Loans
- Low Interest Loans
- Low Interest Personal Loan
- Low Interest Personal Loans
- Low Interest Rate Personal Loans
- Low Loans
- Low Rate Personal Loan
- Low Rate Personal Loans
- Lowest Personal Loan
- Make Money Online For Free
- Manitoba Business Grants
- Manitoba Small Business Grants
- Micro Business Loans
- Micro Loans
- Micro Loans For Small Business
- Military Loans
- Military Personal Loan
- Military Scholarships And Grants
- Minority Business Grants
- Minority Business Loan
- Minority Business Loans
- Minority Grants
- Minority Grants For Small Business
- Minority Small Business Grants
- Minority Small Business Loan
- Minority Small Business Loans
- Moms Going Back To College
- Moms Return To School
- Moms Return To School Government Grant
- Moms Return To School Grant
- Money For Businesses
- Money For Scholarships
- Money For Women Grant
- Money Grant
- Money Grants
- Money Grants For Free
- Money Lenders
- Money Loans
- Mortgage Broker
- Mortgage Rates Today
- Mother Scholarships
- Mothers Scholarships
- Need A Loan
- Need A Personal Loan
- Need A Scholarship
- Need Free Money
- Need Loan
- New Business Finance
- New Business Financing
- New Business Funding
- New Business Government Grant
- New Business Government Grants
- New Business Grant Government
- New Business Grant Money
- New Business Grants And Loans
- New Business Grants Government
- New Business Grants Ontario
- New Business Loan
- New Business Loans
- New Business Loans And Grants
- New Business Start Up
- New Home Construction Loan
- New Small Business Loans
- No Collateral Business Loans
- No Collateral Personal Loans
- No Credit Check Loans
- No Credit Check Personal Loans
- No Interest Loans
- Non Government Grants
- Non Profit Government Grants
- Nova Scotia Government Grants
- Obama 10000 Scholarship
- Obama Grants And Scholarships
- Obama Grants For Mothers
- Obama Grants For Single Moms
- Obama Grants For Single Mothers
- Obama Moms
- Obama Moms Return To School
- Obama Moms Return To School Grant
- Obama Scholarship
- Obama Scholarships
- Obama School Grants For Single Mothers
- Obama Small Business Loans
- Obama Wants Moms To Go Back To School
- Obama Wants Moms To Go To School
- Official Government Grants
- Online Business Loan
- Online Business Loans
- Online Government Grant Application
- Online Government Grants
- Online Grants
- Online Loan
- Online Loans
- Online Personal Loan
- Online Small Business Loan
- Ontario Business Grants
- Ontario Business Loans
- Ontario Government Grants
- Ontario Government Grants For Students
- Ontario Government Small Business Grants
- Ontario Small Business Grants
- Payday Loans
- Payday Loans Online
- Pell Grants For Women
- Personal Business Loans
- Personal Cash Loans
- Personal Finance Loan
- Personal Finance Loans
- Personal Financing
- Personal Government Grants
- Personal Government Grants Free
- Personal Government Loans
- Personal Grant Money
- Personal Grants
- Personal Installment Loans
- Personal Loan
- Personal Loan Application
- Personal Loan Applications
- Personal Loan Broker
- Personal Loan Brokers
- Personal Loan Companies
- Personal Loan Company
- Personal Loan Interest
- Personal Loan Interest Rates
- Personal Loan Lender
- Personal Loan Lenders
- Personal Loan No Credit
- Personal Loan Online
- Personal Loan Quote
- Personal Loan Rate
- Personal Loan Rates
- Personal Loans
- Personal Loans After Bankruptcy
- Personal Loans Bad Credit
- Personal Loans Comparison
- Personal Loans For Bad Credit
- Personal Loans For Poor Credit
- Personal Loans Long Term
- Personal Loans Online
- Personal Loans Rates
- Personal Loans Unsecured
- Personal Loans With Bad Credit
- Personal Unsecured Loans
- Poor Credit Business Loan
- Poor Credit Business Loans
- Poor Credit Loans
- Poor Credit Personal Loan
- Poor Credit Personal Loans
- Poor Credit Small Business Loan
- Private Business Loans
- Private Grants
- Private Lenders
- Private Lenders For Personal Loans
- Private Loan
- Private Loans
- Private Personal Loan
- Private Personal Loans
- Quebec Government Grants
- Quick Business Loan
- Quick Business Loans
- Quick Loans
- Quick Personal Loan
- Real Government Grants
- Real Loans
- Residential Construction Loan
- Retail Business Grants
- Retraining Grants
- Same Day Loans
- Sask Government Grants
- Saskatchewan Government Grants
- Sba Business Loans
- Sba Financing
- Sba Grants
- Sba Loans
- Sba Small Business Loans
- Scholarship And Grants
- Scholarship For Mothers
- Scholarship For Mothers Program
- Scholarship Moms
- Scholarship Mothers
- Scholarships & Grants
- Scholarships And Grants
- Scholarships And Grants For
- Scholarships And Grants For Single Mothers
- Scholarships For College
- Scholarships For Grants
- Scholarships For Moms
- Scholarships For Moms Going Back To College
- Scholarships For Mothers
- Scholarships For School
- Scholarships For Single
- Scholarships For Women
- Scholarships From Government
- Scholarships From The Government
- Scholarships In College
- Scholarships Moms
- Scholarships Mothers
- Scholarships Or Grants For Single Mothers
- Scholarships To College
- School Grants For Single Moms
- School Grants For Single Mothers
- Search Government Grants
- Searching For Scholarship
- Secured Business Loan
- Secured Business Loans
- Secured Loan
- Secured Loans
- Secured Personal Loan
- Secured Personal Loans
- Secured Small Business Loans
- Self Employed Loans
- Short Term Business Loan
- Short Term Business Loans
- Short Term Loans
- Short Term Personal Loan
- Short Term Personal Loans
- Single Mom Government Grants
- Single Mother College Grant
- Single Mother Government Grants
- Single Mother Grant
- Single Mother Grants
- Single Mother Scholarships And Grants
- Single Mothers Grants
- Single Parent Grants
- Small Business Administration
- Small Business Administration Loans
- Small Business And Government
- Small Business Assistance
- Small Business Association Loan
- Small Business Association Loans
- Small Business Bank Loan
- Small Business Bank Loans
- Small Business Banking
- Small Business Canadian
- Small Business Commercial Loan
- Small Business Credit
- Small Business Credit Card
- Small Business Equipment Loans
- Small Business Federal Grants
- Small Business Finance
- Small Business Financing For Women
- Small Business Financing Loans
- Small Business For Women
- Small Business Free Grants
- Small Business Fund
- Small Business Funding
- Small Business Funding Grant
- Small Business Funds
- Small Business Government
- Small Business Government Grant
- Small Business Government Grants
- Small Business Government Grants Canada
- Small Business Government Grants For Women
- Small Business Government Grants Ontario
- Small Business Government Loan
- Small Business Government Loans
- Small Business Grant
- Small Business Grant Application
- Small Business Grant Canada
- Small Business Grant Money
- Small Business Grants And Loans
- Small Business Grants Ca
- Small Business Grants Canada
- Small Business Grants For Minorities
- Small Business Grants For Women
- Small Business Grants For Women 2011
- Small Business Grants From Government
- Small Business Grants From The Government
- Small Business Grants Gov
- Small Business Grants Government
- Small Business Grants Loans
- Small Business Grants Start Up
- Small Business Grants Women
- Small Business Help
- Small Business Lending
- Small Business Line Of Credit
- Small Business Lines Of Credit
- Small Business Loan
- Small Business Loan Application
- Small Business Loan Applications
- Small Business Loan Bad Credit
- Small Business Loan Bank
- Small Business Loan Calculator
- Small Business Loan Canada
- Small Business Loan For Woman
- Small Business Loan For Women
- Small Business Loan Grants
- Small Business Loan Information
- Small Business Loan Interest Rates
- Small Business Loan Online
- Small Business Loan Ontario
- Small Business Loan Poor Credit
- Small Business Loan Rate
- Small Business Loan Requirements
- Small Business Loan Source
- Small Business Loan Start Up
- Small Business Loan Toronto
- Small Business Loan Unsecured
- Small Business Loan Women
- Small Business Loans
- Small Business Loans And Grants
- Small Business Loans And Grants For Women
- Small Business Loans Bad Credit
- Small Business Loans Bank
- Small Business Loans Bc
- Small Business Loans Canada
- Small Business Loans For Minorities
- Small Business Loans For Minority
- Small Business Loans For Veterans
- Small Business Loans For Women
- Small Business Loans From Government
- Small Business Loans Gov
- Small Business Loans Government
- Small Business Loans Government Grants
- Small Business Loans Grants
- Small Business Loans Interest Rates
- Small Business Loans Minority
- Small Business Loans Online
- Small Business Loans Ontario
- Small Business Loans Pa
- Small Business Loans Rates
- Small Business Loans Start Up
- Small Business Money
- Small Business Start Loan
- Small Business Start Up
- Small Business Start Up Financing
- Small Business Start Up Funding
- Small Business Start Up Grants
- Small Business Start Up Loans
- Small Business Startup Funding
- Small Business Startup Grants
- Small Business Startup Loan
- Small Business Startup Loans
- Small Business Unsecured Loan
- Small Business Woman
- Small Business Women
- Small Business Women Grants
- Small Businesses Canada
- Small Businesses Financing
- Small Businesses Grants
- Small Businesses Loans
- Small Commercial Loans
- Small Government Business Loans
- Small Grants
- Small Loan Business
- Small Loan For Business
- Small Loans
- Small Personal Loan
- Small Personal Loans
- Smallbusinessloans
- Start Business Grant
- Start New Business
- Start Small Business
- Start Up Business Financing
- Start Up Business Funding
- Start Up Business Grant
- Start Up Business Loan
- Start Up Business Loans
- Start Up Grants
- Start Up Grants For Small Businesses
- Start Up Loans
- Start Up Small Business Grants
- Start Up Small Business Loans
- Start Your Own Business
- Starting A Business Grant
- Starting A Business Grants
- Starting A Small Business
- Starting A Small Business Loan
- Starting Business Grants
- Starting Own Business
- Starting Small Business
- Starting Up Your Own Business
- Starting Your Own Business
- Starting Your Own Business Grants
- Startup Business
- Startup Business Financing
- Startup Business Funding
- Startup Business Grants
- Startup Business Loan
- Student Business Grants
- Student College Grants
- Student Government Grants
- Student Grants And Loans
- Student Grants And Scholarships
- Student Grants For College
- Student Grants For Single Moms
- Student Grants For Single Mothers
- Student Grants For Women
- Student Grants Loans
- Student Loans Grants
- Student Loans Without Cosigner
- Subprime Loans
- Subprime Personal Loans
- The Obama Scholarship
- Title Loans
- Training Grants
- Types Of Business Loans
- Uk Business Grant
- Uk Government Grant
- Unemployed Loans
- Unemployment Loans
- Unsecured Business Credit
- Unsecured Business Loan
- Unsecured Business Loans
- Unsecured Loans
- Unsecured Personal Loan
- Unsecured Personal Loans
- Unsecured Personal Loans Bad Credit
- Unsecured Small Business Loan
- Unsecured Small Business Loans
- Us Government Grants
- Us Government Grants For Small Businesses
- Usa Goverment Grant
- Usa Goverment Grants
- Va Business Loans
- Va Small Business Loan
- Va Small Business Loans
- Veteran Small Business Loan
- Veterans Small Business Loan
- Where To Apply For Government Grants
- Woman Small Business Grants
- Woman Small Business Loan
- Women And Small Business Grants
- Women Business Grants
- Women Business Loans
- Women Government Grants
- Women Grants
- Women Grants Business
- Women In Business Grants
- Women In Small Business Grants
- Women Small Business Grants
- Womens Small Business Grants
- Www.grants.gov
- Www.loans
Tags
Recent Posts
- McGraw-Hill’s Interest Amortization Tables, Third Edition Reviews
- Essential Guide To Training For Your First Marathon Or Half Marathon
- WealthTrack – James Grant – 04-15-2011 Reviews
- The Actors Rulebook
- Chicago Web Design Company Begins Work On CDW Memorial Foundation Website
- Environmental Groups to Take Root in Singapore: Rikvin
- Funny car commercial. Scary finance manager negotiating used car finance with bad credit people.
- The Ultimate Daycare Starter Kit
- Housing and construction champions announced
- Person To Person Lending Software Service
- Proven methods to Add Financial Market Data with regard Studies (Simon Tuffey)
- Homes and Communities Agency: South Bristol’s regeneration takes major step forward
- Apply For Government Grants Online
- Housing Grants for Single Mothers
- Grant Seeking in an Electronic Age (Part of the Allyn & Bacon Series in Technical Communication)
Recent Comments
- acejamesify on Funny car commercial. Scary finance manager negotiating used car finance with bad credit people.
- GoAceNate on Funny car commercial. Scary finance manager negotiating used car finance with bad credit people.
- c11acr on Funny car commercial. Scary finance manager negotiating used car finance with bad credit people.
- glad90lock on Funny car commercial. Scary finance manager negotiating used car finance with bad credit people.
- MsMarisol1952 on Funny car commercial. Scary finance manager negotiating used car finance with bad credit people.
