Reuters reports:

President George W. Bush would like to see a lengthy U.S. troop presence in Iraq like the one in South Korea to provide stability but not in a frontline combat role, the White House said on Wednesday.

Tony Snow:

“The Korean model is one in which the United States provides a security presence, but you’ve had the development of a successful democracy in South Korea over a period of years, and, therefore, the United States is there as a force of stability…”

He said U.S. bases in Iraq would not necessarily be permanent because they would be there at the invitation of the host government and “the person who has done the invitation has the right to withdraw the invitation.”

“I think the point he’s trying to make is that the situation in Iraq, and indeed, the larger war on terror, are things that are going to take a long time. But it is not always going to require an up-front combat presence,” Snow said.

He added: “The president has always said that ultimately you want to be handing primary responsibility off to the Iraqis. You provide the so-called over-the-horizon support that is necessary from time to time to come to the assistance of Iraqis but you do not want the United States forever in the front.”

Well, this won’t make Democrats happy: they want all US forces to be withdrawn within a couple of years time. Not a second Korea.

On the other hand, of course, America has the responsibility to do whatever necessary to bring stability to Iraq. If this means that America has to stay in Iraq for, say, a couple of decades, well, then America should do so.

However, one might wonder in how far Iraq and South Korea are comparable. For that, see links to posts by others below. I also think that Iraqis will, to put it bluntly, kick the US forces out after a couple of years.

Some reactions:
- Joshua Marshall: “It is hard not to take this as another example that the White House is seriously out of touch with both history and reality when it comes to Iraq. Let’s run through a few differences. First, Korea is an ethnically and culturally homogenous state. Iraq, not a culturally or ethnically homogenous state.”

Secondly: “Without going into all the details, South Korea was a military dictatorship for most of the Cold War.”

- The Booman Tribune repeats, essentially, what Joshua Marshall wrote: South Korea was not a democracy for a long time and South Korea is “almost 100% ethnically Korean. They don’t fight over theological differences.”

- The Carpetbagger Report: “The politics of this matters, as well. Congressional Dems have been saying for quite some time that Bush not only wants a blank check, but that he also wants an open-ended presence in Iraq, with no end in sight.

As of this morning, the official White House response to this, apparently, is, ‘Yep’.”