Iraq: 'dramatically freer, dramatically safer and dramatically better'

Simply put, the US saw their Iraqi dream shatter to pieces, yet seemingly had no alternative plans to the expectation that they would be met with open arms by most of the Iraqi public. It took the US almost four years with the onset of the successful surge strategy, to stop fire-fighting.

Reconstruction efforts have been greatly hampered with unemployment rates high, and a lack of civil infrastructure and medical facilities still common place. However, the job of reconstruction in Iraq, particularly in the aftermath of the chaos, was like rebuilding a house in the middle of a tornado.

The damning verdict on reconstruction was emphasised by a leaked government report in the US, which detailed the failure to apply reconstruction funds into real physical achievements, as it struggled to rebuild what had been devastated by the war.

Harvesting the seeds sown before

For all the popular opinion among some Iraqi and Western commentators, every misfortune or problem currently experienced by Iraq is not purely down to the US.

The key problems engulfing Iraq emanate from its artificial creation in the aftermath of World War I. At that time Iraq was composed of three disparate former Ottoman provinces that were essentially stitched together by Britain and her allies, and then “glued” by dictatorships.

It is true that the US unceremoniously opened a can of worms, however, Iraq would have come to a boil, sooner or later, regardless of US intervention. Americans knew that challenges lay ahead for the new Iraq, but they simply did not appreciate the extent and that it would cost them billions of dollars, see them commit thousands of soldiers and shatter their foreign policy image.

Iraqi politicians have squabbled intensively and failed to pass key legislation, national reconciliation continues to prove elusive; and sectarian violence, despite drastic security improvements, remains a real threat. Surely, all these factors attributable to Iraqis can not all be attributed on the US?

Signing the security pact

Bush’s fourth visit to Iraq was designed to underline strong ties between the US and Iraq, and was to be symbolised by the signing of the SOFA agreement.

On previous visits, Bush’s visits were short and surrounded by tight security, owing much to the volatile atmosphere on the ground. This visit was undertaken with relatively less security, as Bush met with key Iraqi leaders and US commanders inside the fortified green zone.

By Bush’s own admission, the Iraqi project had been "longer and more costly than expected", but despite openly expressing his regret at failed intelligence prior to the invasion, he firmly believed his decision to invade was justified.

With only weeks remaining before President-elect Barack Obama takes charge, many have accused of Bush of tying the hands of the next administration with his policies in Iraq. Obama, inheriting many issues in Iraq and across the Middle East, is now expected to oversee what is hoped to be the final chapter of the US adventure in Iraq - the departure of the estimated 150,000 US forces within the next few years.

Iraqi politicians were quick to praise Bush’s role, with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, hailing the US for an Iraq that was now “dramatically freer, dramatically safer and dramatically better”.