Waning Chances for Stability Navigating Bad Options in Iraq Carlos Pascual and Kenneth M. Pollack Summary Iraq is a failed state ensnared in a civil war. About 2.0 million refugees have fled Iraq, and another 2.2 million people have been displaced internally. The war has taken thousands of American lives and cost hundreds of billions of dollars. What started as a war with a clear enemy has spawned regional instability, transnational terrorism, risks to global oil supplies – and it has bolstered a nuclear-aspirant Iran. Initially, Washington insisted that the problems of Iraq were merely a problem of terrorism, and later of terrorism and an insurgency. However, pulling Iraq out of its nosedive will require the United States to confront the far more difficult problems of Iraq as a failed state and Iraq in civil war. Historically, rebuilding the political, economic, and bureaucratic institutions of a failed state require time, commitment, and a secure environment. Ending a civil war requires a negotiated settlement among the warring parties. Both will be necessary in Iraq for changes in military tactics and augmented troop strength to create conditions for lasting progress. Four options frame the universe of possibilities facing this—and the next— administration: victory, stability, withdrawal, and containment. Victory , as defined by President Bush, is not currently attainable. Stability would concentrate on stopping the fighting, dismantling Al Qa’eda in Iraq, and forging a broad, short-term political agreement that could bridge the way either to real recovery at some later date, or to containment if a truce among Iraq’s warring parties proves unsustainable. Withdrawal would most likely lead to a catastrophic, wider war. Containment is, ultimately, the least bad option if stability proves out of reach. Containment requires The Brookings Institution | 1775 Massachusetts Ave., NW | Washington, DC 20036 | 202.797.6000 | Fax 202.797.2495 www.opportunity08.org | opportunity08@brookings.edu