April 8, 2003
Rumsfeld: Bush will control money to reconstruct Iraq
By Stephen Dinan
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said yesterday that the administration's dispute with Congress over whether the State or Defense department will control the money to rebuild Iraq is irrelevant because the president will spend the money as he deems fit.
"In the last analysis it's the president's policy, and whatever is put forward by the Congress by way of money will be expended in a way that the president decides should be expended," Mr. Rumsfeld said.
As Congress tries to carve out a role for itself in oversight functions and priorities for postwar Iraq, members disagree with the Bush administration's plan to have the Defense Department administer the $2.4 billion for relief and reconstruction efforts there.
The president included his plan in the emergency spending bill he sent to Congress.
But the House and the Senate, in their versions of the bill, rewrote the provision and have the State Department control the money.
Rep. Jim Kolbe, Arizona Republican and chairman of the House Appropriations foreign operations, export financing, and related programs subcommittee, said U.S. law designates the State Department as the manager of foreign assistance money.
"Bottom line: Reconstruction is a civilian role," Mr. Kolbe said.
Several Republican aides also said key members don't want to see military "mission creep" into policing and rebuilding Iraq. Still, Republicans said the administration's request is being considered.
House and Senate negotiators this week are hammering out differences in their versions of the bill.
However, Mr. Rumsfeld said yesterday that the funding particulars aren't important because the president will spend the money as per his judgment.
"The president made a recommendation, and that is his preference. And we'll see what the Congress ultimately decides," he said. "But in the last analysis, it doesn't matter which pocket it's in — it will be spent in the way that the president feels is appropriate to the circumstance."
He also questioned the second-guessing of the plan.
"What's happened here is we've seen people go from debating the war plan they haven't read, and the number of troops and all of that — now they're debating the form of the government, which no one has decided, and what the post-Saddam Hussein regime exercise, activity, organization ought to look like. And I can tell you we've spent a lot of time thinking about it. There's very good people from all the departments," he said.
Aside from the dispute over which federal department will control the money, Congress also is debating what, if any, role the United Nations should have.
Democratic leaders such as Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota said they would like to see a broad role for other nations.
"I think Afghanistan serves as a reasonable model," Mr. Daschle said. "Obviously we've done a lot in providing the leadership, but you've seen a lot of other countries step up to the plate and be engaged, involved, and take responsibility. I would hope we could see the same thing in Iraq."
But there is a strong feeling among many members that the United Nations won't be able to meet the needs in Iraq.
"The U.N. can't do it. What are they going to do, make what's-his-name, Il, from North Korea, the chairman of the reconstruction committee?" House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, Texas Republican, said recently, referring to North Korean leader Kim Jong-il.
URL:http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20030408-56118187.htm |
