How Will McCain Play Iraq?

Cole and Lawrence Korb, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and former assistant Secretary of Defense under Ronald Reagan, agree the influence of AQI has been overplayed in Iraq. Korb shared this bit of local Iraqi color: "I've never met an Iraqi who doesn't smoke, and al Qaeda opposes tobacco."

Even Gen. David Petraeus commented last fall that al Qaeda in Iraq "has been significantly reduced and its actions degraded."

Cole and Korb also indicate very little progress has taken place in Iraq in spite of the surge. Cole says the most recent legislative achievements mentioned by McCain do not mark progress. "The De-Baathification law has been denounced by Sunni's and could potentially force 30,000 of them out of work from current Iraqi government," he says. "The Province law, calling for elections on October 1, was rejected by the Iraqi President's Council." So, Democracy also appears to be out the window.

Korb points as well to a lack of progress on security by the Iraqi government. Noting that the Iraqi Minister of Defense [Abdul Qadir] recently visited the U.S. and said Iraq won't be responsible for their internal security until 2012 or protect their borders until 2018.

Friedman expressed concern about the influence of Iran, saying that with the U.S. no longer in Iraq, Iran would become the dominant military power in the region, and would be able to threaten the largest oil fields in the world. "They would be a short four days march from Saudi Arabia," he says.

It is true that Iran's stature would be increased, as noted in a statement from President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from last summer:

"Of course, we are prepared to fill the gap, with the help of neighbors and regional friends like Saudi Arabia, and with the help of the Iraqi nation."

The threat of an Iranian attack appears overblown. Saddam Hussein found himself in a similar position in 1991 when trying to invade Kuwait. The U.S. and 34 other countries quickly responded to those attacks in Operation Desert Storm. It took seven days to beat back Hussein. Cole says: "Iran has shown no intention of increasing their influence by invading and ruling other countries similar to Saddam's ambitions." Clearly, the U.S. and our European allies have shown more concern about Iran's nuclear capacity.

Cole and Friedman argue that the interesting thing to follow if the U.S. were to withdraw is what would be the fate of the Sunnis? Presently, Sunnis make up 20% of Iraq's population. Cole confirms genocide remains a real concern if the Sunnis choose to oppose a government likely to be dominated by the Shia.

"The debate over Iraq has to be over the opportunity cost of achieving other critical goals for the U.S.," Korb says. He co-authored an op-ed in the Washington Post noting a Democratic president would reap benefits from repositioning the $10 billion a month cost currently spent in Iraq.

The future of Iraq has many moving parts. I think McCain will focus mostly on the emotional issue of surrender, while a Democrat might be forced to follow Korb's advice on debating costs because of an expensive domestic agenda. Moreover, events in the region may also influence the debate as the environment in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan is highly volatile.