thedrifter
01-09-07, 12:40 PM
January 09, 2007
Levin: Without benchmarks, troop surge has no ‘teeth’
By Rick Maze
Staff writer
President Bush’s planned Wednesday announcement of a new strategy for Iraq, expected to include a call for 20,000 to 25,000 more deployed troops, will be missing a key ingredient, according to the new Senate Armed Services Committee chairman.
Without either an end date for U.S. deployment or milestones for Iraq to start assuming more control of its own security while U.S. combat forces begin withdrawing, the new Bush strategy has “no teeth” and is unlikely to be effective, said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.
Levin, who became the armed services committee chairman last week, said at a Tuesday morning meeting with defense reporters that Bush may describe the new deployment plan as a change of direction, but without a mechanism demanding that Iraq begin assuming more control of its own security, the plan is unlikely to lead to the eventual withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq — and could make Iraq even more dependent on the U.S.
“Iraq is now devolving into chaos. We have got to change that course,” Levin said. “The current course isn’t working. The current course is leading to failure.”
The trouble facing Democrats like Levin who think the plan doesn’t do enough is that they have limited power to alter the Bush plan, particularly without the aid of Republicans in Congress.
With 10 to 12 Senate Republicans having expressed their own concerns about the surge of U.S. troops, Levin said it is possible the Senate could pass a resolution or an amendment that attaches strings to any new troop commitment. But a complete cutoff of funding for Iraq operations is unlikely, Levin said, an assessment similar to that issued Monday by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., the House Armed Services Committee chairman.
However, Levin said Congress could pass binding or nonbinding legislation that either limits troop levels — something done in the past to limit combat operations and cap peacetime presence — or expresses the sense of Congress that specific goals are needed.
“I believe it would be extremely powerful and would put pressure on Iraq,” Levin said.
Levin said he isn’t fixed on any one idea but is simply committed to having a proposal that will get the 51 votes needed to pass the Senate. Proposing legislation that fails to pass would end up being an endorsement of current policy, Levin said.
Levin was briefed Monday by the White House on the Bush administration’s new Iraq strategy but declined to provide many details, other than to confirm it calls for an increase of about 25,000 combat troops.
Bush is expected to talk about the importance of success in Iraq “as if that separates him from his critics,” Levin said. “Of course, it doesn’t.”
How much independent advice Bush is receiving from top military officials is unclear, Levin said, adding that Defense Secretary Robert Gates is more likely than his predecessor, Donald Rumsfeld, to provide unwanted advice, but he does not think top military officers are speaking freely about their views.
“Our military leaders have pulled their punches and will continue to do so publicly,” Levin said.
Ellie
Levin: Without benchmarks, troop surge has no ‘teeth’
By Rick Maze
Staff writer
President Bush’s planned Wednesday announcement of a new strategy for Iraq, expected to include a call for 20,000 to 25,000 more deployed troops, will be missing a key ingredient, according to the new Senate Armed Services Committee chairman.
Without either an end date for U.S. deployment or milestones for Iraq to start assuming more control of its own security while U.S. combat forces begin withdrawing, the new Bush strategy has “no teeth” and is unlikely to be effective, said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.
Levin, who became the armed services committee chairman last week, said at a Tuesday morning meeting with defense reporters that Bush may describe the new deployment plan as a change of direction, but without a mechanism demanding that Iraq begin assuming more control of its own security, the plan is unlikely to lead to the eventual withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq — and could make Iraq even more dependent on the U.S.
“Iraq is now devolving into chaos. We have got to change that course,” Levin said. “The current course isn’t working. The current course is leading to failure.”
The trouble facing Democrats like Levin who think the plan doesn’t do enough is that they have limited power to alter the Bush plan, particularly without the aid of Republicans in Congress.
With 10 to 12 Senate Republicans having expressed their own concerns about the surge of U.S. troops, Levin said it is possible the Senate could pass a resolution or an amendment that attaches strings to any new troop commitment. But a complete cutoff of funding for Iraq operations is unlikely, Levin said, an assessment similar to that issued Monday by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., the House Armed Services Committee chairman.
However, Levin said Congress could pass binding or nonbinding legislation that either limits troop levels — something done in the past to limit combat operations and cap peacetime presence — or expresses the sense of Congress that specific goals are needed.
“I believe it would be extremely powerful and would put pressure on Iraq,” Levin said.
Levin said he isn’t fixed on any one idea but is simply committed to having a proposal that will get the 51 votes needed to pass the Senate. Proposing legislation that fails to pass would end up being an endorsement of current policy, Levin said.
Levin was briefed Monday by the White House on the Bush administration’s new Iraq strategy but declined to provide many details, other than to confirm it calls for an increase of about 25,000 combat troops.
Bush is expected to talk about the importance of success in Iraq “as if that separates him from his critics,” Levin said. “Of course, it doesn’t.”
How much independent advice Bush is receiving from top military officials is unclear, Levin said, adding that Defense Secretary Robert Gates is more likely than his predecessor, Donald Rumsfeld, to provide unwanted advice, but he does not think top military officers are speaking freely about their views.
“Our military leaders have pulled their punches and will continue to do so publicly,” Levin said.
Ellie