Saturday, May 26th, 2012

Candidates Press Petraeus on Iraq

By Holly Yeager
Wednesday, April 09, 2008 at 8:28 am

In the run-up to Tuesday’s Iraq war hearings, Sen. Joseph Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, <a title="warned his colleagues" href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0408/9387.html" id="tmdp">warned his colleagues</a> against bringing politics to the proceedings.

“This is life and death stuff,” Biden said. “The biggest mistake we can make is politicizing this [hearing]. The American people are sick of this crap.”

<img width="165" height="165" src="/files/washingtonindependent/folders-pics-icons/Politics.jpg" alt="(Matt Mahurin)" title="(Matt Mahurin)" class="left" /> Through nine hours of testimony before two Senate committees, senators from both parties largely heeded Biden’s call. But the absence of outright political bickering couldn’t conceal the high stakes of the day. The Iraq war, the chief legacy of President George W. Bush, will be a central topic in the election of his successor. And the next president — who was almost certainly in attendance Tuesday — will be forced to set a course for Iraq amid a public that is increasingly weary of the war.

Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) and Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), still sparring for the Democratic nomination, were all drawn away from the campaign trail, eager to weigh in on the conflict -– and to be seen doing so.

None of the candidates mentioned the others by name, but their current and possible future clashes hung over the proceedings. Among the three, it is McCain whose fate is most tightly tied to Iraq. In the Democratic primary, Obama has sought to distinguish himself from Clinton with his early opposition to the war, while she has argued that she has a stronger background on national security.

While Democrats often worry about being portrayed as weak on national security, the party’s presidential candidates were perhaps lucky to have others press Gen. David H. Petraeus, who commands U.S. troops in Iraq, and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador there, on some of the most politically sensitive questions.

“The American people deserve to know when the arrows will finally point to an exit from Iraq,” said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.). “Can you now, just in simple language, tell us, yes, it is worth it and it is making us safer here at home?" asked Sen. John Warner (R-Va.)

Clinton, who after long months of campaigning appeared tired and hoarse, showed her comfort on the committee, posing questions about “battlefield geography and telling Crocker that an agreement about the future of U.S. forces in Iraq should be reviewed by Congress.

But it was Obama – a member of the foreign relations committee, which held its hearing in the afternoon, and the last of the three to speak — who stood out at the end of the day. After raising questions about U.S. hopes with regard to Al Qaeda in Iraq – is the goal total elimination, or just a weakening of their capabilities? – and relations between Iran and Iraq, Obama brought into sharp focus what many have been wondering: just what conditions on the ground will be good enough to prompt the withdrawal of U.S. forces?

In a question that Crocker and Petraeus didn’t answer, Obama asked, "If we were able to have the status quo in Iraq right now," would that be an adequate definition of success? "I’m trying to get to an endpoint," Obama said, then complained about the current policy: "The definition of success is so high."

Yet among the three candidates, McCain received top billing. As the senior Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, he was given time to make an opening statement near the start of the morning session.

McCain has based his campaign on his support for “the surge,” and he took the hearing as an opportunity to show what he insists was the wisdom of that position, recalling the situation in Iraq before the strategy was adopted. “Four years of mismanaged war had brought us almost to the point of no return,” McCain said. “A full-scale civil war seemed almost unavoidable.”

<pullquote>If we were able to have the status quo in Iraq right now, would that be an adequate definition of success?</pullquote>

In a preview of what is likely to be a centerpiece of his general election campaign, McCain said, “And yet, rather than retreat from Iraq…we chose to change strategies.”

As Clinton, another member of the committee looked on – her chin in her hand, as a relatively junior member of the panel, her time to talk wouldn’t come until nearly three hours later – McCain acknowledged that “The job of bringing security to Iraq is not finished.” But, he added, “We are no longer staring into the abyss of defeat, and we can now look ahead to the genuine prospect of success.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a McCain supporter, <a title="told The Washington Post" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/06/AR2008040602425.html" id="t5qq">told The Washington Post</a> the hearings were “sort of a dress rehearsal for who is best prepared to be commander in chief, who has the best understanding of what has happened, what was wrong in Iraq and how to fix it."

Clinton, who has made much of her national security experience, has in recent weeks enraged some Democrats by talking about crossing what she called the <a title="commander-in-chief threshold" href="http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14843.html" id="mnum">commander-in-chief threshold</a>. “I believe that I’ve done that. Certainly, Sen. McCain has done that and you’ll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy.”

But at Tuesday’s hearings, she also sparred with McCain, firing back at comments he made on Monday. Speaking in Kansas City, McCain said pledges by the Democratic candidates to withdraw troops from Iraq amount to <a irresponsibility="" of="" height="" the="" title="" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/07/AR2008040702658.html" id="zyvy">"the height of irresponsibility"</a> and "a failure of leadership."

As she began her allotted six minutes, Clinton bristled at suggestions "that it is irresponsible or demonstrates a lack of leadership to advocate withdrawing troops from Iraq in a responsible and carefully planned withdrawal."

“I fundamentally disagree," Clinton said. "Rather, it could be fair to say that it might well be irresponsible to continue the policy that has not produced the results that have been promised time and time again, at such tremendous cost to our national security and to the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States military."

When his time for questions came, McCain spoke quickly and confidently, like a commander at a briefing with his staff.

When did Petraeus learn of Maliki’s plans for last week’s Basra operation? What’s the lesson to be drawn from the more than 1,000 members of the Iraqi police forces who deserted or underperformed? What are we going to do about attacks in the Green Zone?

Hours later, as Biden wrapped up his panel’s afternoon session, he urged Crocker to provide an answer to Obama’s question. Would a five-year guarantee of the current situation, without U.S. troops to enforce it, be sufficient to consider withdrawal?

“We’ve got to get some ….matrix, for people to get a sense of what we’re talking about,” Biden said. “Otherwise we’re going to lose all support for anything.”

The Washington Independent

Candidates Press Petraeus on Iraq

Comments

No Comments

Trending Now

Multimedia Highlights

AINN Affiliates

The American Independent News Network:

American Independent

Colorado Independent

Florida Independent

Iowa Independent

Michigan Messenger

Minnesota Independent

New Mexico Independent

Texas Independent