Democrats eye alternative to U.S. troop surge plan
By Aamer Madhani
Washington Bureau
Published January 12, 2007, 7:15 PM CST
WASHINGTON -- While Democrats seem to have won the moment by effectively pillorying President Bush's plan to inject 21,500 more U.S. troops into the Iraq war, a strategy that garnered little public support and has proved divisive on Capitol Hill, they now face the dilemma of coming up with a better alternative to stem the sectarian bloodletting.
Earlier this week, Democrats floated a plan to stop the escalation by blocking funding of the war. But Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, acknowledged that such action was unlikely because it would "send the wrong message to the troops."
Still, Levin, who has called for a phased withdrawal to begin in four to six months, said he hoped to garner bipartisan support for a non-binding resolution voicing dissatisfaction with Bush's Iraq policy. Levin said that passing such a resolution could help lay the groundwork for the start of a drawdown of troops in the coming months.
"It's just an open-ended policy," Levin said. "There are no deadlines for the Iraqis, no consequences for failure to meet their commitments."
As Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified on Capitol Hill for the second straight day Friday, the Democrats continued to criticize the plan, although at a lower volume than on Thursday.
Gates and Pace attempted to counter their doubters with assurances that a temporary increase in U.S. troops was the best way to create a stable Iraq and the conditions that would permit a reduction in U.S. forces.
The two also said there are no immediate plans to attack targets in Iran. In his speech this week, Bush vowed to disrupt Iran's aid to insurgents in Iraq and "destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq."
Those comments refer "strictly to operations inside the territory of Iraq, not crossing the border," Gates said, later adding that "any kind of military action inside Iran itself, that would be a very last resort."
The Bush administration has attempted to characterize the plan to bolster security in Baghdad and Anbar province as an Iraqi-designed strategy, but Democrats, who questioned Gates and Pace at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Friday, seemed incredulous.
In November, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki suggested to Bush that American forces push back to the outskirts of Baghdad, and that Iraqi forces would be able to effectively rout out the insurgents and militiamen that now control much of the Iraqi street. But Bush eventually rejected that plan.
Gates insisted that the plan was ultimately the creation of the Iraqi military. While al-Maliki initially wanted Iraqis to take complete control of pacifying Baghdad, the prime minister and his military commanders came to the conclusion that U.S. involvement was necessary, Gates said.
On Thursday, the prime minister failed to show up for a press conference where he was certain to face questions about the new strategy, and the Iraqi government spokesman gave the plan only tepid support.
Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass), who has been one of the most vociferous critics of the so-called "surge," called on Bush to return to Congress for approval before sending more troops to Iraq.
"Why not come back to the Congress?" Kennedy said. "Why not come back and permit us to have a vote on this surge? Let the American people speak through their elected representatives."
Bush invited top Republican leaders from the House and the Senate to Camp David for at least part of the holiday weekend.
After hearing Levin repeat the refrain that Bush's plan to increase troop levels would be a grave mistake during Friday's hearing, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) weighed in with his own critique of those who believe the president should be talking about drawing down instead of ramping up.
"Do they truly believe we can walk away from Iraq?" McCain said. "I believe these individuals ... have a responsibility to tell us what they believe are the consequences of withdrawal in Iraq. If we walk away from Iraq, we'll be back, possibly in the context of a wider war in the world's most volatile region."
Gates and Pace's second day on Capitol Hill was far more civil than the previous day, which included the comment from one Democrat member in the House that the plan was the "craziest, dumbest" idea.
But Friday's visit to the Senate Armed Services Committee, whose members include Bush loyalists Sens. John Cornyn of Texas, Jeff Sessions of Alabama and Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, did not include any heated exchanges.
Gates and Pace attempted to assuage some critics' concerns with assurance that the plan would be reviewed over time, and adjusted in consultation with U.S. commanders on the ground.
But Gates also tried to underscore to skeptical lawmakers that the next year or two would be critical to determining whether Americans would be successful in establishing a semblance of a working democracy in Iraq.
"Mistakes certainly have been made by the United States in Iraq, but however we got to this moment, the stakes now are incalculable," Gates said.
chicagotribune.com |
