The View From Here . . .
By Bob Morgan, Jr.

Much of what happens in the 2008 presidential election will depend on the progress (or lack of it) in Iraq in the coming months.

If the war in Iraq is basically unchanged this time next year, there is almost no way the Republicans will retain the White House. The 2006 midterm vote represented very clear dissatisfaction with the direction of the war and further lack of progress will harden these opinions. Moreover, President Bush's opponents in Congress will further rachet up the pressure for withdrawal and may make a serious effort to cut off funding. Even if leading Republican candidates start to run away from the war, as they have not done so far, the voters will likely have more confidence in a candidate who has been "right all along" about the war than in a newfound convert.

Nevertheless, there are other plausible Iraq scenarios which offer considerably more hope to the GOP. Suppose Mr. Bush's surge works to a considerable degree in stemming the violence in Baghdad and the performance of Iraq forces, while still spotty, improves somewhat. Continuing this scenario, assume that sporadic violence continues almost daily somewhere in Iraq, but the country is considerably quieter and the civilian and military death toll is cut. Reasonably successful local elections are held at the end of the year and the Maliki government, while still quite divided, continues in power, with no real threat of it being toppled. And most significantly, assume that President Bush is able to announce in December that his commanders advise him that limited withdrawals of United States forces will be possible throughout 2008.

In the second type of scenario, voters may well believe that a measured withdrawal, rather than immediate evacuation, is the best course and the Republicans, who traditionally have an advantage in national security, are the better choice to preside over the end of the war. Indeed, either Rudolph Giuliani or John McCain might be perceived as offering stronger leadership than Hillary Clinton or Barak Obama.

While there are a number of analogies to past elections favoring the Democrats (1952, for example, when the unpopular Korean War helped oust the incumbent party from the White House), one that favors the Republicans (assuming of course the more favorable scenario in Iraq) involves the 1972 election during the Vietnam War.

Like President Bush, President Richard M. Nixon attempted to wind down an unpopular war by increased reliance on home country troops (Mr. Nixon labeled his program Vietnamization). United States troops were being steadily withdrawn and the situation on the ground in Vietnam seemed, at least for the time, stable. (Things went seriously downhill years later after funds were cut off.) Mr. Nixon, who also made a number of overtures in 1972 (for example, his trip to China) that made him look like a peacemaker, won a landslide victory over George McGovern, who favored immediate withdrawal and used the slogan "Come Home, America".

Obviously, there is no guarantee that the surge in Iraq will work, even minimally, although it may be our best option, or that the 1972 situation will be repeated. And there are some obvious differences between the present environment and that in 1972. (Mr. Nixon, unlike Mr. Bush, inherited his war and Mr. Nixon was able to keep up support from a "silent majority".)

Still, if a measurable degree of progress in Iraq can be achieved and some hope for an end of the American presence on a reasonably favorable basis, the politics of the war may be considerably different next year than now.