September 7, 2007
A New Report on Iraq Lends Ammunition to Both Parties

By DAVID M. HERSZENHORNWASHINGTON, Sept. 6

An independent commission of military experts, created by Congress to assess Iraq’s military and police force, presented a finely nuanced report to the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday.
But the report could not have been more straightforward for two presidential candidates who are members of the committee: Senator John McCain of Arizona, a Republican, and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, a Democrat. The candidates, though, reached totally opposite conclusions about it, in line with their different positions on the war.
For Mr. McCain, the report provided powerful support for his long-held position that it would be a mistake for Congress to set a firm deadline for withdrawing troops from Iraq. When retired Gen. James L. Jones of the Marines, who led the commission, told the committee, “I think deadlines can work against us and I think a deadline of this magnitude would be against our national interest,” Mr. McCain could not have been more satisfied. “I thank you,” he said.
For Mrs. Clinton, the commission’s finding that there had been little political progress in Iraq buttressed her view that a firm deadline was crucial.
“How do we get the appropriate pressure on the Iraqi government to do what we know they must do for the Iraqi people to have any future and for us to, you know, withdraw?” she asked General Jones. “If we take away deadlines, we take away benchmarks, we take away timelines. What is the urgency that will move them to act?”
The contrasting positions of the two senators provided a stark example of how Republicans and Democrats are maneuvering to shape the discourse on the Iraq war amid a cascade of studies, reports and analyses leading up to reports next week by Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker, the top Americans in Iraq. With much new information at hand, there is little sign so far that lawmakers in either party are changing their views.
At the hearing on Thursday, Democrats continued their sharp criticism of the Bush administration and expressed deep frustration over the slow progress in Iraq. Republicans, meanwhile, sought to highlight the recent military progress and improved security conditions reported by the commission as solid evidence that staying the course in Iraq was the right thing to do.
The most eye-opening comments came from General Jones and other members of the commission, which provided some of the most detailed analysis of military operations in Iraq presented to date on Capitol Hill.
General Jones, in his opening statement, declared, “The Iraqi security forces, as a whole, cannot yet defend the territorial integrity of Iraq.” But he quickly added, “This is not necessarily an alarming conclusion.”
He continued: “Improvement has been noted in the internal security missions — for example, in denying a safe haven to terrorists. And this improvement is likely to continue in the near future.” He also said a major shift in strategy and reduction in American troops might be feasible as soon as early next year.
But General Jones also acknowledged that the grim political situation in Iraq was hampering military efforts and that it remained the biggest obstacle to the eventual withdrawal of American troops.
In addition to providing the progress report on the Iraqi security forces that Congress had requested, the commission also offered an array of suggestions intended, as General Jones put it, to “help in trying to arrive at a way ahead that will enable success in this critical mission.”
Those suggestions included steps to improve the image of the United States military, so it would be seen less as an occupying force and more as a force working for the transition to Iraqi sovereignty.
General Jones said the commission urged the establishment of an “Iraqi-Coalition transition headquarters” that would focus on military, political, economic and legal issues and would “show visible and consistent progress toward transition, which is a crucial message that people need to understand.”
Senators in both parties expressed gratitude for the commission’s work. “I would hope the president would take into consideration the valuable findings that you made,” said Senator John W. Warner, Republican of Virginia, who together with Senator Robert C. Byrd, Democrat of West Virginia, sponsored the law creating the commission.
But the hearing also served as a platform for senators to restate their positions, including Mr. Byrd. “President Bush said we would stand down as Iraq forces stood up,” he said. “We have yet to see much standing up.”
Democrats, among them the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, pressed the commission about why Iraqi security forces had not been able to take on more responsibility, more quickly.
Mr. Levin, who has been working to broker a deal on legislation that would require at least a modest withdrawal of troops, focused repeatedly on those parts of the report suggesting that a reduction of forces in the near future is not only possible but prudent.
“The assumption of that greater responsibility by the Iraqi forces, you’ve indicated should lead to a reduction in the number of our forces,” Mr. Levin said to General Jones. “So far, are we together?”
“We’re together, sir,” the general replied.
Republicans, in turn, focused on the positive developments.
“We can’t just ignore the good news,” said Senator John Cornyn, Republican of Texas. “And that is that you find that the Iraqi armed forces are increasingly effective and capable of assuming greater responsibility for internal security of Iraq.”