A former Washington Post military correspondent answered the question on the mind of anyone considering the United States’ position in Iraq and Afghanistan, ‘how screwed are we?’ with a simple answer: screwed.
Tom Ricks, author of “Fiasco” and “The Gamble” spoke to a packed Physicians Auditorium Feb. 18 about current U.S. policy in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Ricks says he is more optimistic about Afghanistan than Iraq because Afghans have a sense of national identity. Afghans, Ricks said, also know what it is like to live under extreme Islamic rule and know they do not want to go back there.
Ricks said the biggest problem in Afghanistan is that the United States helped install a corrupt and abusive government under President Hamid Karzai.
“The Karzai government is our real enemy in Afganistan,” Ricks said. “Their abuses drive Afghans into the arms of the Taliban.”
Pakistan, Ricks said, poses the largest threat to the United States because a political, military and economic elite rule a country with no national identity.
Ricks did say that he is pessimistic about Iraq and that the U.S. never should have invaded in 2003. The recent surge, however, was a smart tactic, Ricks said.
“I saw the surge. In retrospect, the surge improved security,” Ricks said. “But it did not create a window for a political breakthrough.”
Ricks said the Shiite party is stronger than ever after being repressed for so long.
“The situation in Iraq is similar to South Africa after apartheid,” Ricks said. “The problem is no Shiite Nelson Mandela has emerged. Instead you have a lot of Shiite Al Sharptons saying, ‘we were suppressed before, now it’s our turn to be in control.’”
Ricks said U.S. intervention after the last Iraqi presidential elections nearly led to a civil war and he is nervous about the aftermath of the elections coming March 7. The election is already driving rifts between parties, with the Sunni party already planning a boycott after two of their candidates were banned from the race, according to CNN.
“I am concerned about the government-forming period following the March 7 election. American military presence can deter a civil war that would be blamed on us,” Ricks said. “A civil war in Iraq could quickly become a regional war including Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and others, which would drive up oil prices and could have a global effect on the economy.”
Ricks said the United States was wrong to invade Iraq in the first place, but now the military needs to stay to maintain stability.
“I believe the invasion of Iraq was the worst mistake in the history of U.S. foreign policy,” Ricks said. “I think civil war is avoidable, but there are no good solutions in Iraq. Once you have made a colossal blunder of this size, there are no good answers.”
The alternatives to invading Iraq in 2003, Ricks said, would have been better for the U.S. and the Middle East. Ricks said if the U.S. hadn’t invaded Iraq, they could have focused on Afghanistan and avoided a distraction, strain on the military, cost and debt to China. Ricks also pointed out who the financial burden would fall to.
“I’d like to thank all the college kids here tonight for paying for the Iraq war,” Ricks said. “My generation – we put it on the credit card. But the bill’s in the mail to you.”
The audience was shy going into the question-and-answer period, but they warmed up quickly and Ricks could barely keep up with the hands shooting up around the auditorium.
Ricks answered one question about  American media coverage of Iraq. He said the media has struggled with getting information to the public because there are no stable institutions or clear leaders to get information from.
“The media hasn’t really had a good handle on the war in Iraq. Civil war is hard to cover,” Ricks said.
The front lines of the media force have also left Iraq since 2003.
“You still have people fighting and dying, but the U.S. media has gone home,” Ricks said.
One student asked Ricks about the implications of Iran’s recently publicized nuclear weapon development for Iraq. Ricks compared the situation with the Cold War with the U.S.S.R.
“One thing the U.S. is very good at is containing a nuclear-armed state,” Ricks said. “Like the U.S. did with the Soviet Union, we can contain Iran, sit back and wait for them to collapse internally on their own.”