A Thousand Troops

Six U.S. soldiers were killed, two Italian aid workers were kidnapped and warplanes bombed a Sunni enclave in Fallouja, a city mostly off-limits to coalition troops. It was just another day in the war Tuesday, except for the numbers. By this morning, Iraq time, the Associated Press count of casualties stated that 1,000 U.S. troops had been killed in Iraq, aside from more than 100 other coalition soldiers and thousands of Iraqi noncombatants. And many thousands more have been wounded.

It is an obvious point at which to ask: To what end are U.S. personnel continuing to die? What is it that commanders should tell their troops as they head into lethal streets?

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Tuesday that violence was increasing because insurgents viewed peaceful balloting, set for January, and a democratic constitution as enemies. That conclusion is debatable, perhaps even a smoke screen. What’s not in doubt is insurgents’ view of U.S. troops as the enemy. It’s a belief that unites adherents of the Sunni brand of Islam, who have forced coalition troops out of much or all of the cities of Fallouja, Ramadi and Samarra, and the Shiite Muslims who fought the Americans in the sacred city of Najaf.

U.S. withdrawals have been not the result of military defeat but of political calculation, with interim Iraqi governments fearing the anger that all-out assaults would generate. That’s a valid calculation, but it raises the question of mission. Rumsfeld says soldiers and Marines conduct thousands of patrols a day. They arrest insurgents, he says, and also help repair water and sewer lines and build schools. But as other writers have noted, imagine the Republican reaction to the withdrawals and pullbacks if a Democrat in the White House had ordered them.

The U.S. will not win a war of attrition. Such wars do not favor occupying armies. Enclaves off-limits to soldiers give insurgents staging areas; it was just outside Fallouja that seven Marines in a military convoy died along with three Iraqi national guard members Monday, the deadliest attack on U.S. forces since late April. An attempt to put Iraqi soldiers into the city to battle the Taliban-like Sunnis who run Fallouja failed.

Congress approved $18.4 billion last November to rebuild Iraq, but because of the danger in working for the U.S., little of it has been spent. Now the White House may spend some to bolster security. Another proposal is to create more jobs for Iraqis. If more had been spent on jobs in the beginning, Iraq might be a different place now.

Invading nations have an obligation to try to repair the damage they cause, but armies also need a clearly defined mission. How much are U.S. troops supposed to rebuild? Are they still meant to install democracy? Or will the U.S. settle for any kind of political stability, even if repressive clerics rule the country? Such an outcome was unthinkable as the first troops rolled into Baghdad, yet it’s now seriously discussed.

More Americans will die. Soldiers and Marines deserve to know, as they head out to face snipers and roadside bombs, what they’re meant to accomplish for that price.