The two sides have been running on different tracks for several months. As the Brits outlined their plans for withdrawal, in November and December of last year, the details of Bush’s surge were far from settled. At the same time, the Baker-Hamilton group was releasing an alternative strategy for Iraq. British officials were far more supportive of the study group’s proposals than their counterparts inside the White House were. But the Brits also admitted that their challenges in southern Iraq are much simpler than the sectarian war facing American troops in and around Baghdad. After several rounds of talks, the Americans were eventually satisfied that Britain’s phased withdrawal would truly be “conditions-based”; that the reduction in force was geared to the security situation on the ground and not a politically inspired cut-and-run.
In fact, the British officials concede that Prime Minister Tony Blair has a strong political interest in starting the endgame for his engagement in Iraq before he hands over power to his political ally Gordon Brown. Democrats in Washington, meanwhile, treated the news as a flak jacket against GOP accusations that they support a policy of retreat. “No matter how the White House tries to spin it, the British government has decided to split with President Bush,” said Sen. Ted Kennedy.
On the ground in Iraq, rival Shiite parties are already jockeying for power. “The withdrawal of the British forces is a political decision to save Blair more than it is a decision to help the people of Iraq,” says Ali Yassin of the Fadhila Party in Basra. “We are afraid of the vacuum that will come after the withdrawal of the British forces.”
Britain, which had more than 40,000 troops in the region at the time of the 2003 invasion, now has 7,100 troops in Iraq. Blair said the number could “possibly” drop to below 5,000 by the end of the year. One Downing Street source told NEWSWEEK that it’s “potentially the case” that all British troops could be out of Iraq by the end of 2008. That would happen only if conditions allowed, but he said, “We believe things are heading in that direction.” In that case, the Brits are on the same timeline as most of the Democratic candidates who want to succeed President Bush in 2009.
