Channeling Cuba in Iraq
Topic: History, Iraq War, Middle East, Western Hemisphere|History is circuitous. Go back a hundred and ten years and you will find some eerie correlations with modern events. Most who know their history will tell you the explosion of the USS Maine in Havana Harbor was the cause of the Spanish-American War. To a large extend it was the cause. But ask what caused the ship to explode and the the story gets muddier. The press certainly played a role in stoking the flames of war. William Randolph Hearst is believed to have wired the artist Frederick Remington in Cuba with the line, “You supply the pictures and I’ll supply the war.” Stories of Spanish atrocities there were popular in the “yellow press” of the day. The Cuban revolutionaries were seen in America as later day patriots.
When the US military used the destruction of the USS Maine as a causus belli against Spain, our cause seemed to be just. Not only were we shaking off the remnants of European tyranny in the Western Hemisphere but we were freeing an oppressed people a few short miles from our shore. Cuba Libre! 
The Spanish were easily routed from the last vestiges of their empire and their colonies became American spoils. The global political climate, however, did not involve altruism for altruism’s sake. Manifest destiny seemed to no longer be bound by the limits of seas and oceans. The Cubans (along with the Filipinos) soon realized that one colonizer had been replaced by another. Though tucked neatly in the Cuban Constitution like a thorn on a rose bush, the Platte Amendment set the stage for a long US commitment in Cuba, one in which the Cubans played a secondary role in ruling their own nation. The results of such heavy handedness are still being felt. A Fidel Castro would never had risen in an independent and democratic Cuba.
In recent weeks we have seen similar vestiges of century old polices reemerge. The Iraqi President Nuri Al-Maliki is currently negotiating a new security policy with the US over America’s long term commitment in Iraq. The current policy, as outlined within the UN, expires at the end of this year and the Iraqis are balking at the idea of an extended US presence in Iraq in its current form. One of the key sticking points is the number of bases that would be allowed to field US troops. Malaki wishes to scale down that number. Another issue is the extra-legality of US and mercenary forces in Iraq. Currently the members of the American military and their support forces are not bound by Iraqi legal jurisdictions. The Iraqis want to see a change in this policy. At odds, also, is the number of US combat troops that will be allowed to remain in Iraq and the free will of their commanders to initiate combat operations without consent of the Iraqi authorities. 
On one hand these negotiations are good things. It shows the Iraqis are beginning to exert their political will. On the other hand, the fact the Bush Administration is butting heads with them over these issues leads one to wonder what intentions does the US have for Iraq and what was the real reason why we invaded. There used to be the mantra, “When they stand up, we will stand down.” If the Iraqis are calling for the draw down of US bases and forces, isn’t that what we have hoped for all along? The birth of the new Iraq was so tumultuous. Let’s not botch the end game as well and leave the nation bitter like Cuba in the wake of the Spanish-American War. A strong political will by the Maliki government is a gift and it is time the Bush Administration accepts it.
