Petraeus and Crocker (Inadvertently?) Make The Case for Iranian Diplomacy

Based on the opening statements from Gen. David Petraeus and Amb. Ryan Crocker [1], shifting blame onto Iran for the continuing violence in Iraq appeared to be a major objective of their congressional testimony. Establishing that blame helps conservatives make a justification for launching an additional war with Iran.

But those Iran talking points crumbled under simple questioning. Media headlines today focus on Petraeus' plan to "pause" what was only a trickle of troop withdrawals [2], and the frustration of senators from both parties [3] at the lack of a plan to eventually end the occupation. If the goal was to put a spotlight on Iran, Petraeus and Crocker failed.

Both tried to raise alarms that so-called Iranian-backed "special groups" (which, as my colleague Rick has noted [4], may not really exist) are fomenting violence and cannot go "unchecked."

But, as Washington Independent's Spencer Ackerman flagged [5], Sen. Jack Reed forced Crocker to acknowledge than Iran also has ties to the Shia militia with which we're allied (though Crocker said our friends are out of the "overt" milita business.) Democracy Arsenal's Ilan Goldenberg noted [6] Sen. Barbara Boxer's observation "that the President of Iran gets the red carpet treatment [when visiting Iraq] and our President has to sneak into the country," indicating that the Iraqi government does not see Iran as a major threat, and the Iraqi people are less likely to shoot at Iranian leaders. Petraeus had acknowledged earlier [7] that Iran "presumably" wants a "Shiite democratic" state to succeed, and Crocker later described meeting with Iran's president was "in the category of a normal relationship" between the two neighboring countries.

They never backed off their claims from the opening statements, but they never successfully squared the claims with all that we know about the Iraq-Iran relationship.

And they certainly didn't produce any sort of case for attacking Iran. Even if you accept that "special groups" are adding to Iraq's sectarian violence, Petraeus' and Crocker's acceptance of a degree of Iranian regional influence bolsters the case for serious diplomacy to ensure Iranian cooperation in stabilizing Iraq.

The Petraeus-Crocker duo were treated as untouchable when they testified last year. Yesterday, they were mere mortals, questioned respectfully but open to challenge.

And challenging potential half-truths, false assumptions and misinformation is what's needed to avert another unnecessary war.