(Susan Walsh/AP)
General David Petraeus testifies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Democratic and Republican senators yesterday strained against the bonds that threaten to tie down the US military in Iraq for the remainder of President Bush’s term and beyond.
In the second day of the congressional progress report on Iraq, the upbeat assessment from General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker received a rougher ride than it had on Monday.
Barack Obama, a leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination next year, suggested that they were asking the American people for limitless patience over a “disastrous foreign policy mistake”. He asked: “The question everyone is asking is, how long will this take and at what point do we say ‘enough’?”
The Senate committee hearings yesterday were given added political charge because of the presence not only of a clutch of presidential candidates but also of senior Republicans nervously eyeing next year’s elections.
General Petraeus and Mr Crocker have set out recommendations, expected to be endorsed by Mr Bush in a televised address tomorrow , for the withdrawal of 30,000 of the 168,000 US troops in Iraq by next summer.
That would bring numbers back down to the level before this year’s surge, but still leave the military with an open-ended combat commitment in Iraq. The White House believes this will improve Mr Bush’s chances of achieving a positive legacy in Iraq which will enable his successor to fight on.
The President is expected to plead with Congress for at least another six months of his “surge strategy” so that Iraq can assume greater responsibility for security and take meaningful steps towards political reconciliation.
But the 2008 US presidential elections now loom large over such efforts. Hillary Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination, told General Petraeus yesterday that his claim of progress “required the willing suspension of disbelief”. She said that the failures of the government in Baghdad had been matched by those in Washington, adding: “You have been dealt a very hard hand, and it’s a hand that is unlikely to improve.”
Mr Obama, who hopes to capitalise on his opposition to a war which Mrs Clinton once supported, will today travel to Iowa — the first state to pick its nominee — to make a key speech about Iraq before embarking on a campaign swing through the state, with four meetings on the same issue.
John McCain, a Republican candidate for the presidency, yesterday began a week-long “No Surrender Tour” across Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina “to rally support for our troops and their mission in Iraq”.
“No one can be certain of success,” Mr McCain said yesterday. “We can be sure, however, that should the United States Congress succeed in legislating a date for withdrawal, and thus surrender, then we will fail for certain.” Earlier, he had suggested some troops may have to remain in Iraq for years to come, just as they have in the Balkans and South Korea.
Other Republicans, however, have growing doubts. “We should acknowledge that we are facing extraordinarily narrow margins for achieving our goals,” said Richard Lugar, the top Republican senator on the Foreign Relations Committee yesterday.
“It is not enough for the administration to counsel patience until the next milestone or the next report. We need to lay the groundwork for sustainable alternatives.” At the Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, Senator John Warner said that Mr Bush’s “forward strategy” could no longer be underpinned by repeated promises of political progress in Baghdad. Mr Lugar and Mr Warner are among those still hoping to establish a crossparty consensus similar to that proposed last year by the independent Iraq Study Group. Indeed, both Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton — despite promising to end the war — acknowledge that they would retain a “residual force” in Iraq for some years.
But hopes of a cross-party consensus could evaporate in the heat of the 2008 campaign, with Mr Bush’s determination to stay the course only likely to increase the pressure on Democrats to support a withdrawal of all troops.
Joe Biden, the Foreign Relations Committee chairman and another Democratic presidential candidate, asked yesterday: “Should we be telling the American people that we’re there for another three, four, five, six, seven, 10 years in relatively large numbers?” Mr Crocker replied: “It certainly will be well beyond the end of next summer before Iraq can achieve the end state I’ve laid out.” Senator Chuck Hagel, a Republican opponent of the war, asked: “Are we going to continue to invest blood and treasure at the same rate we’re doing now? For what?” He raised the withdrawal of British troops from Basra last week, saying he had been told that the four southern provinces of Iraq “are gone — they are lawless”. He described the remaining British forces as “huddled in the airport”.
General Petraeus insisted that “the British did a good hand-off”, adding that he will fly to London this week for talks on ensuring that “we have a common sight picture on that”.
No comments:
Post a Comment