G
Gandalf Grey
Guest
www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-iraq-strategyapr07,0,2076912.story
chicagotribune.com
Iraq effort faces fresh Hill scrutiny
Petraeus, Crocker to testify as fighting, strain on GIs rise
By Aamer Madhani
Washington Bureau
April 7, 2008
WASHINGTON - On the heels of tough fighting in southern Iraq and renewed
concerns over strains on the U.S. military, the conversation on America's
long-term prospects in Iraq has shifted once again, creating an altered
backdrop for an appearance on Capitol Hill this week by Gen. David Petraeus
and Ambassador Ryan Crocker.
The much-anticipated visit from the U.S. commander and the senior American
diplomat in Iraq comes days after Gen. Richard Cody, the Army's departing
vice chief of staff, warned that lengthy and repeated deployments are
placing "a significant risk" on the largest branch of the military.
The political landscape has been further changed by renewed violence in two
of Iraq's largest cities. On Sunday, rockets slammed into the fortified
Green Zone and a military base in Baghdad, killing three U.S. troops and
wounding 31 others. At least 20 Iraqis were killed in the capital as U.S.
and Iraqi forces battled militiamen loyal to Shiite cleric Moqtada Sadr.
This followed a six-day campaign in Basra by the Shiite-dominated Iraqi
army - aided by U.S. and British troops-against Sadr's Mahdi Army militia, a
battle that ended without a clear winner.
Critics of last year's buildup of nearly 30,000 troops in Iraq say the
inconclusive end to the battle-some believe it left Sadr with a strengthened
hand-underscores that the Iraqi government has made little progress on the
security or political fronts.
"The surge is prolonging instability, not creating the conditions for unity
as the president claims," said retired Lt. Gen. William Odom, who headed the
National Security Agency under President Ronald Reagan. "More disturbing,
Prime Minister [Nouri al-] Maliki has initiated military action and then
dragged in U.S. forces to help his own troops destroy his Shiite
competitors."
A mess or a message?
U.S. military officials and proponents of the surge have launched a spirited
defense of the troop buildup, dismissing talk that events in Basra were a
setback. Walid Phares, a senior fellow at the conservative Foundation for
Defense of Democracies, said that with the assault on Basra the al-Maliki
government put Sadr and his followers on notice that militia control of
Basra won't be tolerated.
"We have to wait and see what happens next," said Phares, who directs the
foundation's Future Terrorism Project. "This could be the Maliki government
sending the message that what we did in Baghdad and the Sunni triangle
against Al Qaeda [in Iraq] is what we we're preparing to do next in the
south."
In the first few months after President Bush announced the troop buildup,
the U.S. military faced some of the most pitched violence of the 5-year-old
war in the Iraqi capital and elsewhere. But by the end of last summer,
violence had plummeted as Sunnis in some of the country's most hostile areas
turned against Al Qaeda in Iraq.
About 90,000 Sunni men joined local security groups, funded by the U.S.
military, to protect their areas from militants. Hardscrabble Baghdad
neighborhoods, such as Dora and Adhamiyah, saw shuttered markets reopen and
long-empty streets bustle once again.
In some western cities, such as Ramadi, the improvements seemed even more
pronounced. Some American units went from facing daily gunfire and roadside
bombs to going weeks without an attack.
Many Democratic war critics conceded that the security situation had
improved, and in a heated presidential contest, debate over Iraq took a back
seat to the faltering economy.
Depth of gains probed
But the Basra episode, which pitted Shiite nationalists and rogues loyal to
Sadr against establishment Shiites, has created new concerns.
While U.S. commanders and diplomats framed the Basra events as evidence of
the al-Maliki government taking the initiative, Democrats are pointing to
the Iraqi army's unsuccessful gambit as evidence that little progress has
been made.
Crocker told reporters in Baghdad last week that he learned of the operation
four days in advance but that he did not anticipate "a major battle" from
the onset. He discounted the assertion that the Basra incident reflected
poorly on the surge's accomplishments.
Still, the question remains how deep are the gains-particularly on the
political side of the ledger for the Iraqis.
A new report released Sunday by the U.S. Institute of Peace - and authored
by some of the same experts who advised the Iraq Study Group-concludes that
political progress has been "so slow, halting and superficial, and social
and political fragmentation so pronounced, that the U.S. is no closer to
being able to leave Iraq than it was a year ago."
Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee,
said he would press Crocker and Petraeus this week for details on the Basra
assault, focusing on why the U.S. military had little knowledge of the scope
of the assault.
"The top Iraqi leader has shown once again with his actions in Basra how
incompetent an administration he runs," Levin said.
"The Bush administration has put all of its eggs in the Maliki basket, and
he's shown himself to be a political leader who is excessively sectarian,
who is incompetent and who runs a corrupt administration."
All three leading presidential contenders are expected to attend the
hearings, where Democrats likely will point out that the truce between
government representatives and Sadr reportedly was brokered in Iran,
bolstering the prestige of a nation the administration has accused of sowing
unrest in Iraq and arming attacks by militants against U.S. troops.
'Pause' may be pushed
In his testimony, Petraeus is expected to recommend a "pause" in troop
withdrawals after combat brigades sent as part of Bush's troop buildup
return home.
A pause could mean that troop levels would be at about 140,000 after the
last of five brigades returns home, in July, though Pentagon officials have
suggested it may be possible for further withdrawals to resume later in the
summer or early fall.
Military officials - from the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to
brigade commanders-acknowledge that the long and frequent deployments are
grinding on the troops.
A senior administration official told The Associated Press that the White
House will announce this week that Army tours in Iraq and Afghanistan will
be reduced from 15 months to 12, the typical tour of duty before the troop
buildup.
In their testimony, Petraeus and Crocker are expected to accentuate the drop
in violence since the additional U.S. troops arrived while acknowledging
that the Iraqis have made little progress toward political reconciliation.
But some analysts say even the military progress could easily come undone.
For one thing, the Basra battle seemed to reflect Sadr's power to control
events. The cleric, who holds great sway over the Shiite slums of eastern
Baghdad, called for a six-month cease-fire in August and renewed his call in
February.
His restraint may be as important a factor as the infusion of U.S. troops in
reducing the violence, said Lawrence Korb, who served as an assistant
secretary of state in the Regan administration and is a senior fellow at the
liberal-leaning Center for American Progress.
Levin and other Democrats also have pointed out that the violence may have
declined in part because millions of Iraqis have fled mixed Shiite-Sunni
neighborhoods for more homogenous areas of the country, or left the country
altogether.
Scattered reports emerged during the fighting that some Iraqi troops were
deserting or turning over their arms to Sadr's militia, and The New York
Times reported that more than 1,000 Iraqi soldiers and policemen refused to
fight or abandoned their posts during the operation.
"If you compare it to where you were two weeks ago, you went backwards,"
Korb said. "It's not a question of training. It's a question of motivation."
Tribune correspondent Liz Sly contributed from Baghdad.
Copyright
chicagotribune.com
Iraq effort faces fresh Hill scrutiny
Petraeus, Crocker to testify as fighting, strain on GIs rise
By Aamer Madhani
Washington Bureau
April 7, 2008
WASHINGTON - On the heels of tough fighting in southern Iraq and renewed
concerns over strains on the U.S. military, the conversation on America's
long-term prospects in Iraq has shifted once again, creating an altered
backdrop for an appearance on Capitol Hill this week by Gen. David Petraeus
and Ambassador Ryan Crocker.
The much-anticipated visit from the U.S. commander and the senior American
diplomat in Iraq comes days after Gen. Richard Cody, the Army's departing
vice chief of staff, warned that lengthy and repeated deployments are
placing "a significant risk" on the largest branch of the military.
The political landscape has been further changed by renewed violence in two
of Iraq's largest cities. On Sunday, rockets slammed into the fortified
Green Zone and a military base in Baghdad, killing three U.S. troops and
wounding 31 others. At least 20 Iraqis were killed in the capital as U.S.
and Iraqi forces battled militiamen loyal to Shiite cleric Moqtada Sadr.
This followed a six-day campaign in Basra by the Shiite-dominated Iraqi
army - aided by U.S. and British troops-against Sadr's Mahdi Army militia, a
battle that ended without a clear winner.
Critics of last year's buildup of nearly 30,000 troops in Iraq say the
inconclusive end to the battle-some believe it left Sadr with a strengthened
hand-underscores that the Iraqi government has made little progress on the
security or political fronts.
"The surge is prolonging instability, not creating the conditions for unity
as the president claims," said retired Lt. Gen. William Odom, who headed the
National Security Agency under President Ronald Reagan. "More disturbing,
Prime Minister [Nouri al-] Maliki has initiated military action and then
dragged in U.S. forces to help his own troops destroy his Shiite
competitors."
A mess or a message?
U.S. military officials and proponents of the surge have launched a spirited
defense of the troop buildup, dismissing talk that events in Basra were a
setback. Walid Phares, a senior fellow at the conservative Foundation for
Defense of Democracies, said that with the assault on Basra the al-Maliki
government put Sadr and his followers on notice that militia control of
Basra won't be tolerated.
"We have to wait and see what happens next," said Phares, who directs the
foundation's Future Terrorism Project. "This could be the Maliki government
sending the message that what we did in Baghdad and the Sunni triangle
against Al Qaeda [in Iraq] is what we we're preparing to do next in the
south."
In the first few months after President Bush announced the troop buildup,
the U.S. military faced some of the most pitched violence of the 5-year-old
war in the Iraqi capital and elsewhere. But by the end of last summer,
violence had plummeted as Sunnis in some of the country's most hostile areas
turned against Al Qaeda in Iraq.
About 90,000 Sunni men joined local security groups, funded by the U.S.
military, to protect their areas from militants. Hardscrabble Baghdad
neighborhoods, such as Dora and Adhamiyah, saw shuttered markets reopen and
long-empty streets bustle once again.
In some western cities, such as Ramadi, the improvements seemed even more
pronounced. Some American units went from facing daily gunfire and roadside
bombs to going weeks without an attack.
Many Democratic war critics conceded that the security situation had
improved, and in a heated presidential contest, debate over Iraq took a back
seat to the faltering economy.
Depth of gains probed
But the Basra episode, which pitted Shiite nationalists and rogues loyal to
Sadr against establishment Shiites, has created new concerns.
While U.S. commanders and diplomats framed the Basra events as evidence of
the al-Maliki government taking the initiative, Democrats are pointing to
the Iraqi army's unsuccessful gambit as evidence that little progress has
been made.
Crocker told reporters in Baghdad last week that he learned of the operation
four days in advance but that he did not anticipate "a major battle" from
the onset. He discounted the assertion that the Basra incident reflected
poorly on the surge's accomplishments.
Still, the question remains how deep are the gains-particularly on the
political side of the ledger for the Iraqis.
A new report released Sunday by the U.S. Institute of Peace - and authored
by some of the same experts who advised the Iraq Study Group-concludes that
political progress has been "so slow, halting and superficial, and social
and political fragmentation so pronounced, that the U.S. is no closer to
being able to leave Iraq than it was a year ago."
Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee,
said he would press Crocker and Petraeus this week for details on the Basra
assault, focusing on why the U.S. military had little knowledge of the scope
of the assault.
"The top Iraqi leader has shown once again with his actions in Basra how
incompetent an administration he runs," Levin said.
"The Bush administration has put all of its eggs in the Maliki basket, and
he's shown himself to be a political leader who is excessively sectarian,
who is incompetent and who runs a corrupt administration."
All three leading presidential contenders are expected to attend the
hearings, where Democrats likely will point out that the truce between
government representatives and Sadr reportedly was brokered in Iran,
bolstering the prestige of a nation the administration has accused of sowing
unrest in Iraq and arming attacks by militants against U.S. troops.
'Pause' may be pushed
In his testimony, Petraeus is expected to recommend a "pause" in troop
withdrawals after combat brigades sent as part of Bush's troop buildup
return home.
A pause could mean that troop levels would be at about 140,000 after the
last of five brigades returns home, in July, though Pentagon officials have
suggested it may be possible for further withdrawals to resume later in the
summer or early fall.
Military officials - from the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to
brigade commanders-acknowledge that the long and frequent deployments are
grinding on the troops.
A senior administration official told The Associated Press that the White
House will announce this week that Army tours in Iraq and Afghanistan will
be reduced from 15 months to 12, the typical tour of duty before the troop
buildup.
In their testimony, Petraeus and Crocker are expected to accentuate the drop
in violence since the additional U.S. troops arrived while acknowledging
that the Iraqis have made little progress toward political reconciliation.
But some analysts say even the military progress could easily come undone.
For one thing, the Basra battle seemed to reflect Sadr's power to control
events. The cleric, who holds great sway over the Shiite slums of eastern
Baghdad, called for a six-month cease-fire in August and renewed his call in
February.
His restraint may be as important a factor as the infusion of U.S. troops in
reducing the violence, said Lawrence Korb, who served as an assistant
secretary of state in the Regan administration and is a senior fellow at the
liberal-leaning Center for American Progress.
Levin and other Democrats also have pointed out that the violence may have
declined in part because millions of Iraqis have fled mixed Shiite-Sunni
neighborhoods for more homogenous areas of the country, or left the country
altogether.
Scattered reports emerged during the fighting that some Iraqi troops were
deserting or turning over their arms to Sadr's militia, and The New York
Times reported that more than 1,000 Iraqi soldiers and policemen refused to
fight or abandoned their posts during the operation.
"If you compare it to where you were two weeks ago, you went backwards,"
Korb said. "It's not a question of training. It's a question of motivation."
Tribune correspondent Liz Sly contributed from Baghdad.
Copyright
