Even as Gen. David Petraeus told Congress he expects to withdraw a Marine contingent from battle this month and about 30,000 more troops by next summer, skeptical Democratic leaders set the stage Monday for more furious debate over the war by planning votes as early as next week to pull troops out much faster.
In his long-awaited review of the war’s progress, Petraeus provided a generally upbeat snapshot, saying U.S. military objectives in Iraq are being met “in large measure,” with violence declining and Al Qaeda in Iraq insurgents and Shiite militia extremists on the run. “In recent months, in the face of tough enemies in the brutal summer heat of Iraq, coalition and Iraqi security forces have achieved progress in the security arena,” Petraeus said.
Throughout the Capitol, lawmakers not at the hearing holed up in their offices to watch on television as Petraeus delivered his assessment before two House committees. Their reaction to the general’s assessment will dictate the direction of the debate in coming days, and members of both parties said September could determine the future of U.S. involvement in Iraq.
A four-star general who commands all U.S. forces in Iraq, Petraeus appeared in full military regalia alongside Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq. But it was not clear how their assessments would influence sentiments about the unpopular war, either in Congress or among the wider public. Before he even delivered his testimony, Petraeus sat poker-faced as Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, and Rep. Tom Lantos (D-Calif.), chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, derided the success of the current troop “surge,” attempts at political reconciliation among Iraqi factions and the truthfulness of the Bush administration.
Lantos said that “myopic” administration policies have created a “fiasco” in Iraq. “We need to send [Prime Minister Nouri al-] Maliki’s government a strong message loud and clear,” Lantos said. “Removing a brigade is nothing but a political whisper, and it is unacceptable to the American people and to the majority of the Congress.”
Just hours before the hearing, al-Maliki delivered his own positive assessment of the security situation in Iraq, echoing Petraeus and Crocker about progress made but also facing skepticism from parliament members in Baghdad. U.S. officials, meanwhile, announced the deaths of nine U.S. soldiers Monday, seven in one vehicle accident in the capital.
Members of Congress had eagerly anticipated Petraeus’s testimony, and some had put off making public decisions about their support for troop withdrawals to first hear the views of the general, who is also the architect behind the “surge” and the military’s counterinsurgency tactics.
For much of the summer, debate about the war has been essentially frozen as Republicans said they would wait to see whether the increase in troops had improved security in Iraq and the nascent democracy in Iraq had taken hold.
‘I wrote this testimony myself’
Democrats argued that even if flooding 30,000 more troops into Iraq has reduced violence, it would not be worth much if the country’s warring factions did not move toward political reconciliation.
Responding to doubts among his critics, Petraeus sought to assure lawmakers that his report came from his own analysis. “I wrote this testimony myself,” he said. “It has not been cleared by nor shared with anyone in the Pentagon, the White House or the Congress until it was just handed out.”
Petraeus depicted the gains as significant, if inconsistent.
“Though the improvements have been uneven across Iraq, the overall number of security incidents in Iraq has declined in eight of the past 12 weeks, with the number of incidents in the last two weeks at the lowest level seen since June 2006,” he said.
Petraeus said that about 2,000 Marines will leave Iraq later this month, followed by an Army brigade of up to 4,000 soldiers in mid-December. Four more brigades would withdraw from Iraq by July, he said, leaving the number of troops at the presurge level of about 130,000.
Petraeus said he would decide in March whether to reduce force levels further.
Crocker painted a less positive picture about the diplomatic front. “As we look ahead, we must acknowledge that 2006 was a bad year in Iraq,” the ambassador said. “The country came close to unraveling politically, economically and in security terms. 2007 has brought some improvements. The changes to our strategy last January — the surge — have helped change the dynamics in Iraq for the better.”
Protesters periodically erupted in shouts as an exasperated Skelton ordered Capitol police officers to remove them. “This is untolerable!” he said. “We will not allow it.”
A majority of Americans has long opposed the war in Iraq, placing pressure on Congress to find a way out. Democrats face heat from their party’s anti-war faction, and Republicans are torn between support for the White House and an increasingly restive public. A new USA Today/Gallup poll indicated that most voters expected Petraeus to simply promote the Bush administration’s agenda, and that 60 percent favored a timetable for withdrawal.
Although Petraeus and Crocker are scheduled to deliver the same remarks to the Senate on Tuesday, lawmakers in both chambers were paying close attention Monday.
‘They refuse to vote for it’
Assistant Senate Majority Leader Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said the Senate would proceed to a number of Iraq votes next week designed to pressure President Bush and Republicans to bring the war to an end.
But he acknowledged that Democrats do not have the numbers to overcome a filibuster, let alone override a presidential veto. And while many Republican senators have criticized the course of the war, they are hesitant to vote for withdrawing troops by a certain date.
“Many of them give speeches suggesting they want a change of policy, and then they refuse to vote for it on the floor,” Durbin said.
Republican leaders said they believe their colleagues are feeling more comfortable with the war strategy and less willing to abandon the administration, now that reports of military progress have begun emerging.
“There’s been a stiffening of the line because of the success,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). “They were heading for the exit signs before.”
Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) said voters are not raising Iraq as often or as passionately in town hall meetings with lawmakers, so Republican senators feel less pressure to support legislation that would withdraw troops.
In the House, Democrats expect to hold votes on a firm deadline to begin withdrawing troops. But few Republicans have been willing to join them, and Democratic leaders acknowledge that they do not have enough support to overcome a Bush veto.
Still, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) suggested Petraeus’s withdrawal schedule would be too slow.
“The president’s strategy in Iraq has failed,” Pelosi said. “It is time to change the mission of our troops to one that will promote regional stability and combat terrorism, so that the numbers of our brave men and women in uniform in Iraq can be reduced on a much more aggressive timetable than the one outlined today by Gen. Petraeus.”
At Monday’s hearing, Republicans offered words of support for Petraeus and Crocker, but Democrats were uninhibited. Lantos called Petraeus’s proposal “a token withdrawal.”
Petraeus, however, disagreed. “A very substantial withdrawal,” he countered.
– – –
IN THE WEB EDITION
Read “Inside the Surge,” a Tribune special report following the men of Bonecrusher Troop’s 3rd Platoon in Iraq, at chicagotribune .com/platoon
———-
jzuckman@tribune.com
