The Bush administration has seen its role in Iraq as one that redefines the Middle East.

This is a quote from Condoleezza Rice in that regard:


link

This Barbara Slavin article seems to be claiming that the administration is going to back off that goal significantly




Mideast democracy initiative is reshaped

The question for debate is:

Is this a genuine policy shift about our role in Iraq? Why or why not? If so, how do you think it will effect our mission in Iraq?

Interesting question. Unfortunately I think what has happened is that you have put the cart before the horse in this case. The Bush Administration's Mideast policy is being determined by the events in Iraq, not the other way around. As far as I see it, the failure to successfully peacefully engage Iraq in reform has demonstrated that even the most secular of Arab countries does not accept America's political influence (American money however seems to be embraced); forcing a rewrite of policy aims.

In the specific case of Iraq; until the President's most recent Press Conference the administration had been backing away from the language of "installing a democracy," and appeared to be looking at a more modest goal of simply creating a stable regime that would be receptive to American pressure. The fact that democracy was reasserted by Bush a few days ago, and this press release tells me that there is still a great deal of uncertainty on how to proceed in Iraq; with the only surefire conclusions being that Mideast intervention is more complicated than previously estimated.