Now Iraqi "sovereignty" is "limited". Isn't that like being partially pregnant? I always thought a country was sovereign or not. But that's just me.
Limited Iraqi Sovereignty Planned
Coalition Troops Won't Answer to Interim Government, Wolfowitz Says
Josh White and Jonathan Weisman
The new Iraqi interim government scheduled to take control on July 1 will have only "limited sovereignty" over the country and no authority over U.S. and coalition military forces already there, senior State and Defense officials told Congress this week.
In testimony before the Senate and the House Armed Services committees, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz and Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman said the United States will operate under the transitional law approved by the Iraqi Governing Council and a resolution approved by the U.N. Security Council last October. Both those provisions give control of the country's security to U.S. military commanders.
Whereas in the past the turnover was described as granting total sovereignty to the appointed Iraqi government, Grossman yesterday termed it "limited sovereignty" because "it is limited by the transitional law . . . and the U.N. resolution."
Under the current plan, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan's special adviser, Lakhdar Brahimi, will appoint a temporary government that will run Iraqi government agencies for six months and prepare the way for January 2005 elections of an assembly that will select a second, temporary government and write a constitution.
Wolfowitz described the July 1 government as "purely temporary" and there to "run ministries . . . but most importantly, they'll be setting up elections." In addition he said, the government will run the police force "but in coordination with Centcom [the U.S. Central Command], because this is not a normal police situation."
"So we transfer sovereignty, but the military decisions continue to reside indefinitely in the control of the American commander. Is that correct?" Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.) asked the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Richard B. Myers, on Tuesday. "That's correct," Myers replied.
"Sovereignty is not something we can, or want, to take back," Wolfowitz said yesterday, outlining efforts to develop a large, new armed force there. "The security of Iraq . . . will be part of a multinational force under U.S. command, including Iraqi forces."
Wolfowitz's comments came as he and Myers conceded that war costs in Iraq are rising, and senior House Republicans pledged to give the military more money this year, whether or not the Bush administration asks for it.
Wolfowitz, under questioning before the House committee, said that as of January, the United States was spending $4.7 billion a month, and he noted that "there may be a bump up" because of the 20,000 more troops currently there. Myers told the panel that intense combat, higher-than-expected troop levels and depleted military hardware "are going to cost us more money."
About $700 million in added troop costs have been identified, and Myers said the service chiefs have identified a $4 billion shortfall.
"We thought we could get through all of August," Myers said. "We'd have to figure out how to do September. . . . We are working those estimates right now."
"And we've got to take a look and see if we have the wherewithal inside the [Defense Department] budget," he added.
Armed Services Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) replied, "The committee, I think, General, is inclined to help you perhaps more than has been suggested by the Pentagon."
But military officials, defense contractors and lawmakers from both political parties say an emergency infusion of cash will be needed far sooner -- perhaps by midsummer. Members of Congress pleaded yesterday with the administration to be more forthcoming.
The administration would be well served here to come forward now, be honest about this, because the continuity and the confidence in this policy is going to be required to sustain it," Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) said.
Strains on the war-fighting budget put the White House on the defensive, with administration spokesman Scott McClellan insisting yesterday that the troops have the necessary resources even as he left open the possibility that more money might be coming this year. President Bush's budget for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 contains no money for military operations in Iraq, and his budget director has said a request for additional funds will not come until January at the earliest.
McClellan said the White House has "assurances from Pentagon officials that the resources they have at this time are more than enough to meet their needs." Bush has said that troops in Iraq will get all the resources and support they need.
Myers focused for the first time on a dilemma the occupation authority created by pushing creation of a 40,000-member Iraqi army, without realizing that it should not be used for meeting the security problem. "We don't want to go back to the old ways of the Iraqi army where they were used for internal security and some of the atrocities," Myers said.
Therefore, he said, some money for further army spending is being transferred to police, border security and the Iraqi Civil Defense Corps. It was one brigade of the new Iraq army that refused to join U.S. Marines fighting in Fallujah.
Wolfowitz noted that the Iraqi police appear to be doing better, but the example he used also shows the weaknesses. He said that during the uprising in Baghdad's Sadr City area last month about 140 AK-47s were taken from the newly trained police and "all but 62 have been recovered."
He also reported that at one police station in a better part of Baghdad "a majority have performed reasonably well" except when faced with "overwhelming force." In that case, he said, "some significant fraction just took off."
Grossman said it will cost State almost $1 billion to staff and protect the new U.S. Embassy in Baghdad that will take over for the CPA on July 1. Grossman noted that his department plans for 1,000 Americans in the embassy and not 3,000, as had been projected.
washingtonpost.com
lurqer |
