Intelligence Probe Would Be Risky for Bush
A full-blown investigation of Iraq intelligence failures would pose election-year risks for President Bush. No one could be certain where it would lead, who it would touch or what it would uncover.
But resisting an investigation has hazards, too, because that would give Democratic presidential rivals an opening to keep the issue alive and question what the White House might be hiding.
A bipartisan proposal for an independent investigation is blossoming into a prominent issue on the presidential campaign trail and on Capitol Hill. The issue moved to the fore when former chief U.S. weapons inspector David Kay said he believed Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction and Bush's decision to go to war was based on inaccurate intelligence.
For now, the White House appears to be playing for time, hoping the furor will die down. Bush refused to endorse the idea of an independent investigative commission on Friday but insisted, "I want to know the facts." The administration needs more time to investigate, he said.
With Republicans in control of Congress and the White House, it's unlikely an independent commission would be created without the president's blessing.
While Bush once raised dire warnings, he now seems to say Saddam's weapons were almost beside the point. "Saddam Hussein was a danger," Bush said. "The world is a better place and a more peaceful place and the Iraqi people are free" without him
In terms of the weapons, Bush argues that the Iraq Survey Group once headed by Kay should pursue its investigation, as long as that takes.
Whenever that investigation is complete, the administration will compare its findings with the pre-war evidence that Bush found conclusive - it led him to say that Saddam threatened the world with "some of the most lethal weapons ever devised." Of course, the investigation - and then the comparison - will take time and there is no guarantee it would be concluded before the election.
"It's like a basketball game, and he's got the ball and there's a problem here and there and he's just going to play out the clock. And he may be able to do it," said James Thurber, director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University.
The specter of world threats and danger is a key element of Bush's re-election campaign. His strongest suit against Democrats is his leadership of the war against terror, polls show, and the White House is eager to protect and enhance that reputation.
"Presidents don't seem to like to admit mistakes and he can't attack the intelligence community, for heaven's sake," said presidential analyst Stephen Hess of the Brookings Institution. "He's still the commander in chief. ... And yet if he's doing his job he'd better knock some heads together in the intelligence community, or figure out at least what we should be doing that we didn't do before."
Democratic presidential candidates already accuse Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney of manipulating pre-war intelligence to make the case for invasion.
Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean says Cheney berated midlevel analysts at the CIA because their weapons' analyses weren't strong enough.
Sen. John Kerry says there are "very legitimate questions about what the vice president of the United States was doing at the CIA." Dean and Kerry, along with their fellow presidential candidate, Sen. John Edwards, support creation of an independent commission. But it is not strictly a partisan issue: Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona supports the idea, too.
Kay's recent comments have created another major headache for an administration already being investigated for the leak of an undercover CIA employe's name, and for mistakes that some say may have left the nation vulnerable to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
The administration wants the Sept. 11 commission to wrap up its work and is resisting its request for a deadline extension. The leaks investigation is in the hands a federal grand jury, beyond the control of the White House.
By their very nature, investigations have the potential to embarrass a White House - such as the Tower Commission's investigation into the U.S. sale of weapons to Iran and the diversion of proceeds to Contra rebels in the mid-1980s. Ronald Reagan gave the commission conflicting accounts of what happened and wound up looking befuddled, concluding that he simply did not remember.
Beyond the obvious political risks, an intelligence investigation could put a heavier strain on ties between the White House and the CIA, particularly Director George Tenet. The White House blamed Tenet last year for the failure to stop Bush from saying in his State of the Union address that Iraq had sought uranium from Niger for weapons.
The administration seems happy to have that feud behind it.
"I've got great confidence in our intelligence community," Bush said this week. "These are unbelievably hardworking, dedicated people who are doing a great job for America."
miami.com
lurqer |
