As we approach the five year anniversary of the United States’ invasion of Iraq, be assured that media coverage will be focused on the failures that have beset the American-led mission.

Frequently it seems the progress that has been made in Iraq is often classified information not available to the public, while depressing topics hit the press with great ease. This fact underscores the importance to review what reasons our nation still has left to believe that Iraq will one day be a democratic success story.

When measuring the progress made in the country, one must begin with the fact that Saddam Hussein is gone from the top. Although President Bush led the United States to war largely under the erroneous pretense that Iraq had ties to weapons of mass destruction, many tend to forget that the ex-dictator Hussein was himself culpable of killing people in numbers typically reserved for ‘ coincidentally ‘ WMDs. A chronological sampler of Saddam’s destruction might open some eyes. His r√É©sum√É©:

1980: Saddam begins an eight year war against neighboring Iran fresh off their Islamic Revolution and indefensible to the Iraqi invasion. The dictator’s attempt to expand the Iraqi border costs nearly 1.5 million people their lives; by war’s end Iran attributed the deaths of over 100,000 of its citizens to Iraqi chemical weapons.

1988: Saddam’s ‘Anfal Campaign’√ù reaches its climax as attacks are launched on Iraqi Kurdistan to weaken a growing Kurdish movement that threatens the stability of his government and had warm ties with Tehran. According to prosecutors who pressed charges against former Iraqi officials in 2006, the late dictator’s campaign killed upwards of 180,000 Kurds.

1991: This was the year when Saddam Hussein had a gigantic coming-out party ‘ only it was held in Kuwait. Gaining international recognition (and condemnation), Saddam’s Iraqi forces swept through the small neighboring Arab state to which he owed billions from funding related to the aforementioned Iran-Iraq war. This short-lived invasion was met by a true international collation that drove Saddam’s men back into Iraq; during retreat the dictator had his goons set Kuwaiti oil wells ablaze, triggering an environmental disaster which will have hazardous long-term effects to all parties exposed to the pollution.

It is inconceivable that anyone could believe that removing Hussein from Iraq was neither a significant action nor a step in the right direction. After Saddam’s ousting, things in Iraq seemed to go downhill for a while, but that changed once the United States altered their military policy in Iraq.

It has been nearly a year since the much talked about U.S. troop surge went into effect, bringing nearly 30,000 more American troops into Iraq. Currently, many point to the continued terrorist attacks and causalities inflicted on American troops as reasoning for a withdrawal from Iraq.

Ever since the surge, however, violence in Iraq appears as a downward trend. American Gen. David Petraeus, who oversees all operations in Iraq, noted before the new year that violence was ‘down approximately 60 percent from June 2007 and are now at a level last seen consistently in the early summer of 2005.’

Despite all of this progress, perhaps the greatest hope that Americans and Iraqis can have for success lies neither with stories about a deposed dictator or successful tales about a new military strategy. Rather, hope is contained in a belief that Iraq will one day find its way to become a beacon of democracy in the Middle East and the value of US-Iraqi relations will sky rocket.

In a region where the corrupt government of Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan is called an ally, ditto with a dishonorable one in Israel, an increasingly radical one in Turkey and the bunch of two-timers in Saudi Arabia, the upside to good relations with a strong Iraq is immeasurable ‘ and vital to the future successes of both nations.