It’s hard to know what to make of a President and an administration that brings over 90,000 troops home while ordering 50,000 soldiers along with 75,000 military contractors to remain.

Over 150,000 personnel are still stationed in Iraq and the US is supposed to be completely out of the country by 2011. That’s next year. Bringing home thousands by the end of this August is a good step, but we really need to step on it. Obama’s speech strikes me as an exercise in Orwellian double-think: the US is simultaneously withdrawing and expanding its military presence in Iraq. So which is it? And, importantly, how does the peace movement communicate with people who think the war is effectively over at the end of August?

Jeremy Scahill has written recently in The Nation that “Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is presiding over what is shaping up to be a radical expansion of a private, US-funded paramilitary force that will operate in Iraq for the foreseeable future…”.

Unfortunately, the State Department is dragging its heels as much as the Pentagon and has requested funds from Congress to hire 6,000 – 7,000 more “security contractors” and train them like soldiers. While working under the auspices of the State Department, these new personnel would have the status of “diplomats.” But who ever heard of a diplomat trained like a soldier and armed with a gun?

This one step forward, one-hundred steps backward approach to Iraq makes many a head spin, but one thing is clear: That so many troops are coming home so soon after Obama took office a year and a half ago is a victory not of the war, but of the peace movement.

As Obama emphasized in his speech, by the end of August over 90,000 troops will have come home since he took office and hundreds of bases will have been closed or turned over to Iraq.

The work of countless activists and organizers has changed the political landscape and now we’re seeing some results. We’ve marched, protested, signed petitions, and written letters to the editor. Without the peace movement’s dedicated organizing and mobilizing to elect a candidate who would commit to ending this war, we wouldn’t be seeing so many of our soldiers returning “as promised and on schedule” during this “season of homecomings,” as Obama put it. But we still have a long way to go. In his recent speech, Obama didn’t say a thing about military contractors, or those so-called diplomats who are doing the work of soldiers.

And, unfortunately, Obama plans to keep another, more disastrous, promise of his this year — to escalate the war in Afghanistan. Will our troops come home from Iraq only to be redeployed to Afghanistan?

Unlike under Bush, there will be no speak of “Mission Accomplished” in Iraq from the Obama administration. We have helped turn the tide of public opinion against the Iraq War enough that no one is buying it anymore. Partially thanks to WikiLeaks, few will be buying wholesale into the Afghanistan War either. The peace movement can make use of this new information to expose war crimes and bring this injustice to an end.

Before Obama took office, many of us began to feel hopeless about ending the Iraq War. Now we have to realize, with some healthy skepticism, that an end (of sorts) is in sight. What kind of end to the Iraq War do we envision and how are we helping to bring it about? How can we take the lessons learned from our organizing to end the Iraq War to our work to bring an end to the quagmire in Afghanistan?

Your voice is needed. Write a short Letter to the Editor or an online comment about the Iraq debacle.

With the troops coming home from Iraq, we should reflect on the results of this devastating invasion. We need to flood the media with our comments and our recommendations for lessons learned from this unjust war.

Click below to go to our Letter to the Editor page, where you can find newspapers near you to submit your letter to:

http://bit.ly/iraqdebacle

While it may seem like a step forward toward ending the six-year occupation of Iraq, the Pentagon is doing what it can to dodge or play down these SOFA stipulations. In recent weeks, it has been re-classifying bases and troops, hiring “corporate security” mercenaries, and preventing Iraq from having jurisdiction over those actions. It’ll get away with it too, as Congress never ratified the SOFA, and because many are justifying further occupation under the banner of keeping Iraq secure.

Leading up to the June 30th deadline, the Pentagon has been playing shell games with bases and with soldiers. City limits have been modified to exempt bases from the agreement and soldiers who have moved out of cities are now encircling them. As Erik Leaver points out in his article “A Withdrawal in Name Only,” three thousand troops stationed at the FOB Falcon, located within Baghdad, will not be moving, because Iraqi and American military officials simply decided it wasn’t within the city limits. And thousands of troops in bases sleeping outside the cities will continue to serve in “support” and “advisory” roles in the day.

And while troops may be moving out of the cities, they are not moving out of the country just yet. The military has been expanding and building new bases in rural areas to accommodate the movement of soldiers, and Congress just passed a bill that includes more funding for military construction in Iraq. In reality, only 30,000 troops have left Iraq since September last year and 134,000 troops still remain.

But the 132,000 military contractors in Iraq are the real loophole. How do they fit into the withdrawal plan? How many of them will stay past June 30th? Or past 2011? Military contractors have been used extensively in the War in Iraq to evade legal accountability and hide the true cost – and body count – of the war. In fact, mercenaries may be on the rise and will spark additional violence in the country.

Arab-American journalist Dahr Jamail points out the violence in Iraq has largely been quelled because the U.S. has paid Iraqi resistance fighters to keep the peace, and the increase in violent resistance in May and June is due to many fighters losing their paychecks from the US government. In his blog, MidEast Dispatches, Jamail writes:

“Attacks against U.S. forces are once again on the rise in places like Baghdad and Fallujah, where the Iraqi resistance was fiercest before so many of them joined the Sahwa (Sons of Iraq, also referred to as Awakening Councils) and began taking payments from the U.S. military in exchange for halting attacks against the occupiers and agreeing to join the fight against al-Qaeda in Iraq. Daily we are watching Sahwa members leave their security posts.”

He further explains that many Iraqis are rejoining the resistance in protest of losing their paychecks and increasing government attacks, and thus, have stopped targeting al-Qaeda.

Instead of continuing to pay these resistance fighters, the U.S. plans to replace some soldiers and Marines in Iraq with mercenaries — private U.S. contractors and corporations. This new occupying force will continue to alienate Iraqis and delay any real Iraqi independence.

But despite working all the loopholes, the U.S. never officially committed to playing by the rules of an Iraq withdrawal, anyway. In 2007 and 2009, members of Congress including then-Senator Hillary Clinton believed the SOFA should have been ratified by Senate to be legitimate. During the 2008 presidential campaign, Clinton urged Obama to sign on to her legislation that would have required Bush to bring the SOFA to Senate first. Obama, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, never agreed to do so. But once Clinton dropped her opposition to Obama’s unanimous selection as the Democratic presidential nominee, and was rewarded by being chosen as Secretary of State, she put her SOFA principle aside and now supports an agreement that only one country – Iraq – has ratified. The U.S. Senate’s role in ratifying bilateral agreements has been nullified, a development that should worry all who have been concerned about a “unitary executive” and an increasingly weakened Congress.

Even in Iraq, withdrawal plans have been undermined. The Iraqi parliament planned to ratify the SOFA under a national referendum this month. But recently the Iraqi cabinet decided to reschedule to align with the national parliamentary elections in January 2010. The SOFA is widely unpopular and seen as legitimizing the US occupation until 2011. If it goes to a vote, it will likely be defeated. So Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and other Iraqi leaders have colluded with both the Bush and Obama administrations to subvert the will of the Iraqi people.

If by July 31 however the Iraq SOFA is not referendum-ratified or a 12-month cancellation notice issued, it will expire. If it expires, the U.S. will be in Iraq without legal authorization and U.S. forces may be subject to lock down until the matter is resolved. Under these conditions, U.S. troops will no longer have the bilateral protections – effectively left in a legal and political limbo.

Ultimately, the Pentagon must stop playing chess games to slow down a real withdrawal. And our leaders in the White House and Congress – who just passed another $70 billion for the war – must take real leadership to end this war, including withdrawing all our troops, ending the use of military contractors, stop funding any permanent bases in Iraq, and allowing the Iraqi people the space to reclaim their country.

According to the Status Of Forces Agreement (SOFA) between the U.S. and Iraq, all U.S. troops must be withdrawn from Iraqi cities by today, June 30. It also gives the Iraqi government jurisdiction to give permission to U.S. troops for military operations and bans the U.S. from staging attacks on other countries from Iraq. Thus, today, some Iraqis are celebrating the end of U.S. soldiers in their streets and the open destruction of their homes, schools and infrastructure.

But the U.S. occupation of Iraq is far from over. A massive number of troops — more than 130,000 — remain in Iraq in addition to more than 130,000 military contractors. Obama also plans to keep 50,000 military personnel there past 2011. The strategy now is to encircle cities including Baghdad (and those particularly to the north) with bases, home to troops who will work inside the cities by day in various roles. Some are given the mandate to train and assist Iraqi forces, however, their numbers and continued presence will fuel further resistance and violence, continuing to destabilize the region. The Pentagon is dodging the SOFA principles, and Obama is still far from fulfilling his promise.

We look forward to the day when we can truly celebrate — alongside the Iraqi people — an end to the U.S. occupation and the fulfillment of our responsibility to help Iraqis rebuild the country we have so destroyed.

For more information, please contact Jean Stevens, national CODEPINK media coordinator, at 508-769-2138 or Jodie Evans, CODEPINK co-founder, at 310-621-5635.

Returning a few months later, however, we found the country devastated. Bustling markets were empty, the streets were those of a ghost town. Electricity was rare if at all and gas lines were miles long. U.S. soldiers in Humvees sped down the streets with an embarrassing arrogance. Jerry Bremer had just arrived and had issued 100 edicts that infuriated every Iraqi. The story on the street was that it only took Saddam a month to get the country back in shape after the Gulf War, thus, impatience and anger toward the U.S. were growing. Over and over, we heard from Iraqis, “We had one Saddam and now we have hundreds.”

We were in Iraq to see how to support women in the transition, going to meeting after meeting of how they were going to be included. Zainab Salbi from the non-profit peace group Women for Women International (W4WI) was in many of those meetings with us, including a reception that Bremer threw inside the Coalition Provisional Authority, now the Green Zone. Her father was Saddam’s pilot and her mother had sent her to the U.S. to marry out of concern for her safety. I talked to Zainab a few days ago to learn about her most recent trip to Iraq.

“In six years they have destroyed Iraq,” her eyes teared as she began to tell me what she found. She used the image of a pen trying to balance on the tip of her finger to describe Iraq now: balancing but very unstable. Since she was there last it is a bit safer. Women who had been in exile and hiding for four years were starting to reemerge. But more than 70 percent of the women are not sending their daughters to school. I asked her about the women from the Bremer reception, 20 women have been killed and most others are gone.

When I asked about Baghdad, she asked which one. “There are two distinct Baghdads, the red one and the green one,” she said. “And they do not relate. On the red side, they call the Americans the ‘friendly other side’.

The Embassy/Green Zone is another city within a city, now one-fourth of Baghdad, she explained. It was built for 5,000 employees and already people are having to double up, it has burst past 5,000. Most of those who live there are not Iraqi but Ugandan, Peruvian, Burmese, etc. They cannot leave the Green Zone, so they have no idea about what is outside the walls. She overheard a conversation about a car bomb while she was inside and learned three soldiers were killed. She wondered why do the United States sends people to Iraq to get double pay and hazardous benefits when they are not even going outside the walls.

U.S. soldiers were still a part of Baghdad while she was there. People are still living without electricity but it has gotten a bit better, something like two hours on and three hours off, she said, this change has helped to engender the window of calm she experienced. It was still spring and she felt like the flowers of Iraq was beginning to bloom again. There was more hope because less violence, but the country still is very fragile.

There is nothing made in Iraq for sale. Not even those fantastic cucumbers we loved so much on our drives through the country. Bremer had created a five-percent flat tax for imports in one of his edicts, so Iraqi can’t produce anything. It will always cheaper to bring it products from the from outside. No other country would ever allow such a thing. The Bremer policies were made to destroy Iraq from the inside out.

I asked Zainab about her grandfather’s house, a beautiful home on the Tigres River where she had held her first classes for W4WI there six years ago. She has since closed W4WI because it became too dangerous, in the meantime it had become a torture den then a brothel. This turned the conversation to trafficking, which she said is horrendous. Most of the girls in prison are between the ages of 12 to 18. They were kidnapped, taken to Syria or surrounds, trafficked and when they get sick or too old brought home to the authorities because they didn’t have the right papers and put in jail. Midwives also told her of a huge increase in abortions from the prostitution.

Just six years ago, only the old and very religious were covered, women were employed everywhere and Baghdad University was bustling with young women. Now it is bleak. Zainab was able to go uncovered but it is still mandatory for the Iraqi women. Most businesses she visited had no women working, not to say they did not try, but they’re just fired within days. Some older women were able to keep their jobs but young women have no way in. She said the university was very sad with much less women. Women, young women have been sent back to the dark ages.

She too can’t find the way to affect the gridlock of people believing it is over. The U.S. has not taken responsibility to restore the country it destroyed. Iraqis need us to hold those responsible who have done this to them and to leave them to rebuild from the shambles. She left our conversation with this: “It basically looks like we do own it and have created our own kind of hell out of it.”

Jodie Evans is the co-founder of CODEPINK Women for Peace and environmental, peace and justice activist for more than 30 years.