thedrifter
07-31-07, 03:02 PM
Mullen: Better dwell time will not come soon
By William H. McMichael - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Jul 31, 2007 14:43:31 EDT
If a post-surge troop presence of 15 combat brigades is kept in Iraq beyond next spring, the U.S. military will need three to four years to get to the Pentagon’s goal of two years at home for every year deployed to the war zone, the nominee for the nation’s top military job told the Senate on Tuesday.
Navy Adm. Mike Mullen also told the Senate Armed Services Committee, “I do think we will be there for years, not months.”
And not just in Iraq and Afghanistan. The war on terror, Mullen said, “will likely take our troops to places we do not now foresee and will demand of them skills they may not yet possess.”
He seemed to acknowledge that one of those potential foes could be Iran. “We must stay ready to deter if possible and defeat if necessary threats from regional powers who possess conventional and in some cases … nuclear capabilities,” he said.
Those are unwelcome assessments for many, given polls showing the Iraq war’s continued and deepening unpopularity in the U.S. and opposition to taking military action against Iran. But it’s the sort of candor committee chairman Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said in his opening remarks that he welcomes from Mullen if he is confirmed to replace outgoing Marine Gen. Peter Pace as leader of the Joint Chiefs.
Given lawmakers’ reactions during the nearly four-hour hearing, there is little doubt the committee will delay that action. A quick confirmation is also expected for Marine Gen. James Cartwright as the vice chairman. If he is not confirmed by Friday, the position would be left temporarily vacant because that is the last day on the job for the current vice chairman, Adm. Edmund Giambastiani, who is retiring.
Amidst all the plaudits, one lawmaker took the occasion to express regret over Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ decision not to recommend that Pace, who served an uncommonly short two years, be renominated for another term. Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., said the move had “everything to do with the politics of an unpopular war.”
“I hope you are treated better than he was as you enter this very difficult and challenging job,” Thune told Mullen.
Mullen was nothing if not candid. He agreed with Levin that political progress in Iraq is lagging. In his written response to pre-hearing questions, he wrote that the Iraqi political leadership, “left to their own internal processes, will have great difficulty achieving the trust required to compromise and move forward on reconciliation.”
Mullen told the committee he’s concerned about the pace of deployment of provisional reconstruction teams, inferring that the State Department is moving too slowly.
Even if he hadn’t testified in person, another written response offered by Mullen put to rest any questions about whether he would be a passive chairman who would shrink from offering candid advice to his civilian superiors.
He was asked what he thought were the most significant mistakes the U.S. has made to date in Iraq. Mullen spelled out just about every criticism ever leveled against the administration’s war. The U.S.:
å Did not fully integrate all elements of U.S. national power in Iraq.
å Focused most attention on the Iraqi national power structures, with limited engagement of the tribal and local power structures.
å Did not establish an early and significant dialogue with neighboring countries, adding to the complex security environment a problematic border situation.
å Disbanded the entire Iraqi army, a potentially valuable asset for security, reconstruction and provision of services to the Iraqi people, providing a recruiting pool for extremist groups.
å Pursued a de-Ba’athification process that proved more divisive than helpful, created a lingering vacuum in governmental capability that still lingers and exacerbated sectarian tensions.
å Attempted to transition to stability operations with an insufficient backup force.
å Failed to communicate with and convince Iraqis and the regional audience of intended U.S. goals.
“I believe that many of these are still having an impact,” he said. But he said he believes the U.S. should not pull out precipitously in response to increasing calls to end the war and bring home the troops.
“I understand the frustration over the war — I share it,” Mullen said. “But I am convinced that, because security in Iraq is tied to security in the region, and because security in the region bears directly on our own national security, we must consider our next moves very carefully.”
Mullen said his top three priorities as chairman would be the defense of the national interests in the Middle East, resetting the armed forces and re-balancing the nation’s global strategic risk.
“There is strain,” Mullen said. “We are stretched. I do not take for granted the service of our people or their families, and I worry about the toll this pace of operations is taking on them, our equipment and our ability to respond to other crises and contingencies.”
Mullen said his goal is to get to a 2:1 rotation ratio “as soon as possible.” He said expanding the active-duty strength of the Army and Marine Corps as currently planned would speed that process.
But his candid assessment of how long it will take to start meeting the Pentagon’s rotation policy goals was sobering news. Even if the current surge of troops ends next spring and the pre-surge total of 15 combat brigades is kept in Iraq, Mullen said he thought it would take one to two years just to get to a 1:1 rotation ratio of 15 months at home for 15 months’ service in the war theater.
And to get to a 2:1 ratio, he said, would take “probably three to four years.”
Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., asked Mullen to repeat that. Mullen confirmed that to get the Iraq force down to roughly half of its current strength of about 160,000 troops, it would take three to four years to get to a 2:1 rotation ratio.
Republican Sen. John Warner, Webb’s fellow Virginian in the Senate and a former chairman of the armed services committee, asked Cartwright how troops can continue fighting hard when they see or hear of repeated political failings on the Iraqi government side.
“They believe in their mission,” Cartwright said. “They’re going to do their best to provide the headroom, if we use that term, to allow that government the opportunity.” At the same time, he said, “There comes a point at which they’re going to look at that and say, ‘How much longer and for what prize?’ if progress isn't seen.”
Mullen promised to give both the troops and the missions ahead his full attention in the years ahead.
“We are a military at war … and war is ugly and messy and painful,” Mullen said. “Our troops are fighting with honor. They are sacrificing bravely and greatly, sometimes with their own lives. Whatever our tasking may be in the future, we are obliged to the American people to defend them and their interests, to make sure we are ready in every way, across every military mission, to do their bidding. We must be able to win both wars and the peace that follows.
“Should you confirm me as the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, you’ll have my unmitigated and unwavering dedication to that task.”
Ellie
By William H. McMichael - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Jul 31, 2007 14:43:31 EDT
If a post-surge troop presence of 15 combat brigades is kept in Iraq beyond next spring, the U.S. military will need three to four years to get to the Pentagon’s goal of two years at home for every year deployed to the war zone, the nominee for the nation’s top military job told the Senate on Tuesday.
Navy Adm. Mike Mullen also told the Senate Armed Services Committee, “I do think we will be there for years, not months.”
And not just in Iraq and Afghanistan. The war on terror, Mullen said, “will likely take our troops to places we do not now foresee and will demand of them skills they may not yet possess.”
He seemed to acknowledge that one of those potential foes could be Iran. “We must stay ready to deter if possible and defeat if necessary threats from regional powers who possess conventional and in some cases … nuclear capabilities,” he said.
Those are unwelcome assessments for many, given polls showing the Iraq war’s continued and deepening unpopularity in the U.S. and opposition to taking military action against Iran. But it’s the sort of candor committee chairman Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said in his opening remarks that he welcomes from Mullen if he is confirmed to replace outgoing Marine Gen. Peter Pace as leader of the Joint Chiefs.
Given lawmakers’ reactions during the nearly four-hour hearing, there is little doubt the committee will delay that action. A quick confirmation is also expected for Marine Gen. James Cartwright as the vice chairman. If he is not confirmed by Friday, the position would be left temporarily vacant because that is the last day on the job for the current vice chairman, Adm. Edmund Giambastiani, who is retiring.
Amidst all the plaudits, one lawmaker took the occasion to express regret over Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ decision not to recommend that Pace, who served an uncommonly short two years, be renominated for another term. Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., said the move had “everything to do with the politics of an unpopular war.”
“I hope you are treated better than he was as you enter this very difficult and challenging job,” Thune told Mullen.
Mullen was nothing if not candid. He agreed with Levin that political progress in Iraq is lagging. In his written response to pre-hearing questions, he wrote that the Iraqi political leadership, “left to their own internal processes, will have great difficulty achieving the trust required to compromise and move forward on reconciliation.”
Mullen told the committee he’s concerned about the pace of deployment of provisional reconstruction teams, inferring that the State Department is moving too slowly.
Even if he hadn’t testified in person, another written response offered by Mullen put to rest any questions about whether he would be a passive chairman who would shrink from offering candid advice to his civilian superiors.
He was asked what he thought were the most significant mistakes the U.S. has made to date in Iraq. Mullen spelled out just about every criticism ever leveled against the administration’s war. The U.S.:
å Did not fully integrate all elements of U.S. national power in Iraq.
å Focused most attention on the Iraqi national power structures, with limited engagement of the tribal and local power structures.
å Did not establish an early and significant dialogue with neighboring countries, adding to the complex security environment a problematic border situation.
å Disbanded the entire Iraqi army, a potentially valuable asset for security, reconstruction and provision of services to the Iraqi people, providing a recruiting pool for extremist groups.
å Pursued a de-Ba’athification process that proved more divisive than helpful, created a lingering vacuum in governmental capability that still lingers and exacerbated sectarian tensions.
å Attempted to transition to stability operations with an insufficient backup force.
å Failed to communicate with and convince Iraqis and the regional audience of intended U.S. goals.
“I believe that many of these are still having an impact,” he said. But he said he believes the U.S. should not pull out precipitously in response to increasing calls to end the war and bring home the troops.
“I understand the frustration over the war — I share it,” Mullen said. “But I am convinced that, because security in Iraq is tied to security in the region, and because security in the region bears directly on our own national security, we must consider our next moves very carefully.”
Mullen said his top three priorities as chairman would be the defense of the national interests in the Middle East, resetting the armed forces and re-balancing the nation’s global strategic risk.
“There is strain,” Mullen said. “We are stretched. I do not take for granted the service of our people or their families, and I worry about the toll this pace of operations is taking on them, our equipment and our ability to respond to other crises and contingencies.”
Mullen said his goal is to get to a 2:1 rotation ratio “as soon as possible.” He said expanding the active-duty strength of the Army and Marine Corps as currently planned would speed that process.
But his candid assessment of how long it will take to start meeting the Pentagon’s rotation policy goals was sobering news. Even if the current surge of troops ends next spring and the pre-surge total of 15 combat brigades is kept in Iraq, Mullen said he thought it would take one to two years just to get to a 1:1 rotation ratio of 15 months at home for 15 months’ service in the war theater.
And to get to a 2:1 ratio, he said, would take “probably three to four years.”
Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., asked Mullen to repeat that. Mullen confirmed that to get the Iraq force down to roughly half of its current strength of about 160,000 troops, it would take three to four years to get to a 2:1 rotation ratio.
Republican Sen. John Warner, Webb’s fellow Virginian in the Senate and a former chairman of the armed services committee, asked Cartwright how troops can continue fighting hard when they see or hear of repeated political failings on the Iraqi government side.
“They believe in their mission,” Cartwright said. “They’re going to do their best to provide the headroom, if we use that term, to allow that government the opportunity.” At the same time, he said, “There comes a point at which they’re going to look at that and say, ‘How much longer and for what prize?’ if progress isn't seen.”
Mullen promised to give both the troops and the missions ahead his full attention in the years ahead.
“We are a military at war … and war is ugly and messy and painful,” Mullen said. “Our troops are fighting with honor. They are sacrificing bravely and greatly, sometimes with their own lives. Whatever our tasking may be in the future, we are obliged to the American people to defend them and their interests, to make sure we are ready in every way, across every military mission, to do their bidding. We must be able to win both wars and the peace that follows.
“Should you confirm me as the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, you’ll have my unmitigated and unwavering dedication to that task.”
Ellie