They Won't Follow Us Home

In a brief statement on the fourth anniversary of the Iraq war this morning, President Bush acknowledged that "it can be tempting to look at the challenges in Iraq, and conclude our best option is to pack up and go home." But, he said. "I believe the consequences for American security would be devastating."

"If American forces were to step back from Baghdad before it is more secure," he predicted, "a contagion of violence could spill out across the entire country. In time, this violence could engulf the region. The terrorists could emerge from the chaos with a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they had in Afghanistan -- which they used to plan the attacks of September the 11th, 2001. For the safety of the American people, we cannot allow this to happen."

Bush's previous predictions for the region have been notoriously incorrect. But as I wrote in my October 26, 2006 column, Why Bush Thinks We're Winning, the president's relentless conviction that American security is at risk has long been the key to understanding his refusal to leave Iraq -- regardless of how many troops die or how little good they appear to be doing.

"What's different about this conflict than some others is that if we fail there, the enemy will follow us here -- I firmly believe that," Bush said in February. It's a line he has uttered, with minor variations, literally dozens of times before and since.

In an unusually frank exchange with conservative journalists in October, Bush explained how he owed his conviction to Gen. John P. Abizaid. (Bush unceremoniously removed Abizaid from his job as chief of Central Command in December, but he hasn't distanced himself from Abizaid's thinking on this issue.)

"Abizaid . . . he's a smart guy -- he came up with this construct: If we leave, they will follow us here. . . . He sees the effects of victory in Iraq as having a major impact on other parts of the Middle East," Bush said. "He also sees the reciprocal of that, a defeat -- just leaving -- the only defeat is leaving, is letting things fall into chaos and letting al Qaeda have a safe haven."

As we enter the fifth year of the war, the debate over withdrawal has grown more clamorous. Evidence mounts that the American presence in Iraq may be doing more harm than good. Large majorities of Americans favor withdrawing all troops within a year. A narrow majority of Iraqis call it "acceptable" to attack U.S. forces.

But is Bush right? Will they follow us home if we leave?

No. At least not according to a story in Saturday's Washington Post by Karen DeYoung and Walter Pincus.

DeYoung and Pincus write: "Al-Qaeda in Iraq is the United States' most formidable enemy in that country. But unlike Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda organization in Pakistan, U.S. intelligence officials and outside experts believe, the Iraqi branch poses little danger to the security of the U.S. homeland.

"As the Democratic Congress continues to push for a military withdrawal, President Bush and Vice President Cheney have repeatedly warned that bin Laden plans to turn Iraq into the capital of an Islamic caliphate and a staging ground for attacks on the United States. . . .

"Attacking the United States clearly remains on bin Laden's agenda. But the likelihood that such an attack would be launched from Iraq, many experts contend, has sharply diminished over the past year as al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) has undergone dramatic changes. Once believed to include thousands of 'foreign fighters,' it is now an overwhelmingly Iraqi organization whose aims are likely to remain focused on the struggle against the Shiite majority in Iraq, U.S. intelligence officials said."