It's a partial wimp-out.

The New York Times is reporting that the Iraq Study Group--the bipartisan panel headed up by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Representative Lee Hamilton--will recommend next week that George W. Bush implement a gradual pullback of 15 brigades of US troops in Iraq. But the group will not call for Bush to set an actual timetable for this withdrawal. The group will also not state whether this redeployment should entail removing troops from Iraq or shuffling them to bases within Iraq or in nearby countries.

The point apparently is to encourage Bush to apply pressure on Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki without forcing him to accept what he has already denounced: a specific schedule for disengagement. But the Baker gang, though soft-peddling the withdrawal option, is slicing the meat rather thin. No matter how gently they put it, Baker and his colleagues--who will also call for a revived regional diplomatic effort--will be asking for Bush to break with his no-retreat rhetoric and to acknowledge a strategic shift is necessary to deal with the mess he has created in Iraq. Which brings me back to an old point: can Bush do this? In recent days, he has been sticking to his latest catch phrase: "complete the mission" (a variant on the discarded "stay the course"). And he refuses to consider the withdrawal of troops as a way to finish the job.

Regardless of what Baker cooks up, the big decision belongs to Bush: will he make any significant changes in his Iraq policy? So far he shows no signs of doing so. Will Baker report's and its half-a-shout for withdrawal compel Bush to reconsider? My hunch is that even though he does not say it publicly, Bush's internal mantra remains the same: stay the course, stay the course, stay the course.

Posted by David Corn at November 30, 2006 10:37 AM