|
The War Profiteers - War Crimes,
Kidnappings, Torture and Big Money |
|
December 5th,
2006 - Gates Says U.S. Not Winning War in Iraq |
|
Gates Says U.S. Not Winning
War in Iraq Nominee Pledges Consultation With Congress, Military Leaders By William Branigin and Ann Scott Tyson Washington Post Staff Writers Tuesday, December 5, 2006; 3:14 PM Robert M. Gates, President
Bush's nominee to be the next secretary of defense, told a Senate
confirmation hearing today that "all options are on the table" in
dealing with the situation in Iraq, and he said he does not believe that U.S.
forces currently are winning the war there. Appearing before the Senate
Armed Services Committee, Gates said in his opening remarks that he is
"open to a wide range of ideas and proposals" in Iraq, and he
pledged to consult urgently with military leaders, combatant commanders in
the field and members of Congress, among others, if confirmed. He warned that the war in
Iraq risks provoking a "regional conflagration" unless a new
strategy can arrest the nation's slide toward chaos. He called the status quo
there unacceptable and said Iraq would be his "highest priority." Asked by Sen. Carl M. Levin
(D-Mich.), the ranking Democrat on the committee, whether "you believe
we're currently winning in Iraq," Gates answered, "No, sir."
He repeated the assessment when asked the same question by Sen. John McCain
(R-Ariz.). In response to a later
question from Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), Gates said he came to
that conclusion during his service with the bipartisan Iraq Study Group.
Until his nomination to lead the Pentagon, Gates was a member of the group,
which is scheduled to formally release its long-anticipated recommendations
on Iraq tomorrow. Gates's view contradicted
the appraisal publicly stated by Bush in an Oct. 25 news conference, when he
said in response to a question, "Absolutely, we're winning" in
Iraq. Bush added then, "As a matter of fact, my view is the only way we
lose in Iraq is if we leave before the job is done." Gates, 63, a former CIA
director and national security adviser who spent 26 years in the intelligence
community, was nominated by Bush to replace Defense Secretary Donald H.
Rumsfeld a day after the Nov. 7 midterm elections, which handed control of
the House and Senate to the Democrats. "What we are now doing
is not satisfactory," Gates told the outgoing committee chairman, Sen.
John W. Warner (R-Va.). Noting that Bush wants
someone with "fresh eyes" to assess the situation in Iraq, the
nominee said, "In my view, all options are on the table, in terms of how
we address this problem in Iraq, in terms of how we can be more successful
and how we can, at some point, begin to draw down our forces." He later said the options he
regards as on the table include one recently listed in a memo by Rumsfeld:
beginning modest U.S. withdrawals so that Iraqi leaders know they have to
"pull up their socks" and take more responsibility for their
country. Gates also said his
open-minded approach extends to the prospect that the United States might
need to hold direct bilateral talks with Iran and Syria, a step that Bush so
far has refused to consider. Iran, which is led by a Shiite Muslim theocracy,
has been accused of meddling in neighboring Iraq by supplying and training
Shiite militias. The Bush administration has charged that Syria has allowed
radical Islamic foreign fighters to use its territory to infiltrate into Iraq
and wage war against the Iraqi government and U.S. forces. Answering a question from
Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) on whether Iraq is "the central
battlefront in the war on terror," as Bush has repeatedly asserted,
Gates voiced a more nuanced view. "I think that it is one
of the central fronts in the war on terror," he said. He cited "a
metastasized terror threat" from radical Muslim "jihadists,"
or holy warriors, since the fall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, saying
that "indigenous radicals" in countries such as Britain, Spain and
the United States "are in fact planning terrorist operations and
activities." While Iraq "certainly
is an important front in the war on terror," Gates said, "I think
we face a more dispersed threat that's really a very amorphous kind of second
front." Gates said historians would
decide whether the U.S. invasion of Iraq was the right thing to do, although
he acknowledged he supported the war when it was launched in March 2003. "Was the decision to go
in right? I think it's too soon to tell," Gates told the committee. His
comment stood in sharp contrast to Bush's unwavering public certitude that he
made the correct choice in ordering U.S. forces into Iraq to depose the
regime of Saddam Hussein. While he is open to new
ideas, Gates said in his opening statement, he feels strongly that developments
in Iraq will shape the future of the entire Middle East, possibly with dire
consequences. "Our course over the
next year or two will determine whether the American and Iraqi people and the
next president of the United States will face a slowly and steadily improving
situation in Iraq and in the region or will face the very real risk of a
regional conflagration," he said. Gates said his
"greatest worry" about Iraq is that if U.S. forces leave the
country "in chaos," a variety of regional powers will become
involved, "and we will have a regional conflict on our hands." More broadly, Gates said,
when it comes to waging the war on terrorism, the United States must achieve
the same kind of bipartisan agreement that prevailed over the generations
during the Cold War. He said such consistency is "imperative" to carry
on "this long war" in a way that America's enemies "don't
think we're going to cut and run." He pledged to work with members of
Congress from both parties "to see if we can forge that kind of
bipartisan approach going forward" so that those who want to harm the United
States "know we're in it for the long haul." In Iraq, Gates said, the
U.S. military presence is likely to continue for "a long time,"
although it could be "dramatically smaller" than the current level
of 140,000 troops. In examining the options in
Iraq, Gates said he would "give most serious consideration to the
opinions" of U.S. military commanders -- consideration that some of
those commanders have privately complained Rumsfeld did not give them. The nominee acknowledged
that, in retrospect, the United States should have sent more forces into Iraq
to control the country after the 2003 invasion. But he told a skeptical
McCain that U.S. commanders in Iraq did not indicate they needed more troops
during his consultations with them in Baghdad as a member of the Iraq Study
Group. Gates also said the U.S.
"de-Baathification" policy after the invasion was a mistake and
that members of Hussein's ruling Baath Party should have been offered a role
in the new Iraq. Warner opened the hearing by
telling Gates, "You simply have to be fearless - I repeat,
fearless" - in advising the president on Iraq and other critical defense
matters. Gates responded later by saying that, especially because his
decisions would have life or death consequences for U.S. troops, he had no
intention of being "a bump on a log" and would express his views
candidly. Gates, who is president of
Texas A&M University, said he has known some of the 12 university
students who have been killed in Iraq. "This all comes down to being
very personal for all of us," he said, noting specifically that 2,889
troops have died in Iraq as of yesterday. Recently, he said, a woman
approached him who has two sons serving in Iraq and pleaded with him,
"For God's sake, bring them home safe." "Now, that's real
pressure," Gates told the committee. After the morning session,
Levin told reporters that he and his fellow Democrats thought Gates delivered
"a very positive presentation" that "bodes well for a speedy
confirmation" and for a "change in direction" in Iraq. Today's hearing offered a
glimpse into how aggressive Democratic lawmakers - many of whom are seeking a
phased pullout of troops from Iraq - may be once they assume the Senate and
House majorities in January. If confirmed, Gates would
take the helm at a time when the United States is pressing the fledgling
Iraqi government and nascent military to crack down on Shiite Muslim militias
and Sunni Muslim insurgents. The Bush administration also is planning to
shift troops from elsewhere in Iraq into Baghdad in an effort to clamp down
on violence; and, more broadly, is considering new options and strategies in
Iraq in search of a way to resolve the entrenched, 3 1/2 -year-old military
conflict. In his opening remarks,
Levin, who will assume the chairmanship of the committee in January, listed a
string of what he called U.S. failures in Iraq. The administration failed to
send in sufficient forces at the start, then "thoughtlessly disbanded
the Iraqi army" and banned low-level Baathists from employment, Levin
said. In the more than three years since, the United States has failed to
secure Iraq, defeat the insurgency, disarm militias, create a viable police
force, rebuild the economy or provide employment, he said. "The next secretary of
defense will have to deal with the consequences of those failures,"
Levin said. Warner praised Gates's
"long and distinguished record of service to the nation" and hailed
the nomination of a new defense secretary at a time when, Warner said, change
in Iraq policy is sorely needed. He urged Bush to review the Iraq Study
Group's report and other policy recommendations, and then seek bipartisan
consensus before formulating new Iraq strategies. "To me, this fulfills a
moral obligation that our government, executive and legislative, has to the
brave men and women of the armed forces of the United States and their
families, who have sacrificed very, very heavily," Warner said. Gates is widely expected to
be confirmed as defense secretary by the full Senate, likely before the end
of the week, when Congress may adjourn for the year. But some Democrats
indicated before today's hearing that they wanted to revisit old questions
Gates faced in 1991, during a bruising battle to become director of the
Central Intelligence Agency during the presidential term of Bush's father,
George H.W. Bush. Levin opposed Gates's
confirmation 15 years ago, in part because Gates had been accused of skewing
intelligence reports while at the CIA. The senator has said he wants
assurances that Gates will be more independent-minded in his new job. Referring to Iraq, Levin
told reporters before the hearing, "We've had enough [of] manipulating
intelligence ... in order to give the policymakers what they wanted to
hear." Early this morning, Bush and
Gates ate breakfast together at the White House, then appeared briefly before
reporters so the president could endorse his nominee. "Bob Gates will be
a fine secretary of defense," Bush said. "I hope for speedy
confirmation so he can get sworn in and get to work. "Those who wear the
uniform know they'll have a friend in Bob Gates." Staff writer Debbi Wilgoren
contributed to this report. External link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/05/AR2006120500152.html |