US:The Iraq Study Group report calls for a comprehensive approach to improving the situation in Iraq, involving a dramatic change in the US military role, a timetable for internal, political action by the Iraqi government and a major diplomatic effort to involve Iraq's neighbours and other interested actors, including the European Union.
The report opens with a bleak assessment of the current situation in Iraq and a warning that there is no guarantee for the success of any new policy there.
"The situation in Baghdad and several provinces is dire. Saddam Hussein has been removed from power and the Iraqi people have a democratically elected government that is broadly representative of Iraq's population, yet the government is not adequately advancing national reconciliation, providing basic security or delivering essential services. The level of violence is high and growing. There is great suffering, and the daily lives of many Iraqis show little or no improvement. Pessimism is pervasive," it says.
The group warns that, if the situation continues to deteriorate, Iraq's government could collapse, the security forces could split along sectarian lines and millions of refugees could be forced to move across the country or to neighbouring countries.
"Turkey could send troops into northern Iraq to prevent Kurdistan from declaring independence. Iran could send in troops to restore stability in southern Iraq and perhaps gain control of oil fields . . . If the instability in Iraq spreads to the other Gulf states, a drop in oil production and exports could lead to a sharp increase in the price of oil and thus could harm the global economy," it says.
Arguing that the US can only tackle the crisis in Iraq in co-operation with other countries, the report calls on the Bush administration to launch an ambitious new diplomatic offensive before the end of this month. It proposes the establishment of an international support group for Iraq involving neighbouring countries and key regional players, including Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Turkey, Jordan and Egypt, as well as the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, the EU and possibly Germany, Japan and South Korea.
"Left to their own devices, these governments will tend to reinforce ethnic, sectarian and political divisions within Iraqi society. But if the support group takes a systematic and active approach toward considering the concerns of each country, we believe that each can be encouraged to play a positive role in Iraq and the region."
A key element of the diplomatic offensive would be "a renewed and sustained commitment" by the US to a comprehensive Arab-Israeli peace that could lead to a return of the Golan Heights to Syria and a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The report stresses that the most important actors in any plan to improve the situation in Iraq are the Iraqis themselves and it sets out a detailed timetable for prime minister Nouri al-Maliki's government to implement steps aimed at political reconciliation. These include a reversal of the de-Baathification law that forbids former members of Saddam's Baath party from holding government jobs and the introduction of an amnesty for those who have fought against Iraqi and US forces. US economic and political assistance would be made conditional on the Iraqi government's fulfilment of the goals outlined.
The group rejects calls for an immediate withdrawal of US forces from Iraq but calls for a swift redeployment of US combat troops, all of whom would be out of Iraq by early 2008. A robust US force would remain in the country, composed mainly of army trainers embedded with Iraqi forces and rapid-reaction and special forces teams.
The report makes clear that the US should not make an open-ended commitment to keeping large numbers of its soldiers in Iraq.
"While it is clear that the presence of US troops in Iraq is moderating the violence, there is little evidence that the long-term deployment of US troops by itself has led or will lead to fundamental improvements in the security situation. It is important to recognise that there are no risk-free alternatives available to the United States at this time. Reducing our combat troop commitments in Iraq, whenever that occurs, undeniably creates risks, but leaving those forces tied down in Iraq indefinitely creates its own set of security risks."