menu
spacer
 
| Ander Nieuws week 6 / nieuwe oorlog 2009 |
 
 
 
Obama seeks accord with military on Iraq

 
The New York Times
January 29, 2009
Peter Baker and Alissa J. Rubin
 
As President Obama moves to redefine the nation's mission in Iraq, he faces a difficult choice: Is he willing to abandon a campaign promise or risk a rupture with the military? Or can he finesse the difference?
 
Since taking office last week, Mr. Obama has recommitted to ending the war in Iraq but not to his specific campaign pledge to pull out roughly one combat brigade a month for the first 16 months of his presidency. His top commander in Iraq has proposed a slower start to the withdrawal, warning of the dangers of drawing down too quickly.
 
On Wednesday, Mr. Obama visited the Pentagon for the first time since becoming president, and he seemed to be looking for an option that would let him stay true to his campaign promise, at least in theory, without alienating the generals. The White House indicated that Mr. Obama was open to alternatives to his 16-month time frame and emphasized that security was an important factor in his decision.
 
"We're no longer involved in a debate about whether, but how and when," Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, said about a withdrawal from Iraq. "That's a process the president wants to take seriously."
 
He added: "He wants to ensure the safety of our troops as we remove our combat brigades; wants to, as I've said repeatedly, provide the responsibility and the opportunity for the Iraqis to do more in governing their own country; and, as I said, to do this in a way that seeks the consultation of all those leaders."
 
Among those consulted by the president was Gen. Ray Odierno, the top commander in Iraq, who has developed a plan that would move slower than Mr. Obama's campaign timetable, by pulling out two brigades over the next six months. In an interview in Iraq on Wednesday, General Odierno suggested that it might take the rest of the year to determine exactly when United States forces could be drawn down significantly.
 
"I believe that if we can get through the next year peacefully, with incidents about what they are today or better, I think we're getting close to enduring stability, which enables us to really reduce," General Odierno said as he inspected a polling center south of Baghdad in advance of provincial elections on Saturday.
 
General Odierno said the period between this weekend's elections and the national elections to be held about a year from now would be critical to determining the future of Iraq. While some American forces could be withdrawn before then, he suggested that the bulk of any pullout would probably come after that.
 
"We are going to reduce forces this year," the general said. "It's the right time to reduce our forces here. I believe that Iraqis are making progress. It's time for us in some places to step back and give them more control." He added, "What we want to do is to slowly shift our mission from one that's focused on counterinsurgency to one that's more focused on stability operations."
 
After a session at the White House last week, with General Odierno participating via secure video, Mr. Obama traveled to the Pentagon on Wednesday to meet with the service chiefs. The discussion ranged beyond Iraq and Afghanistan, covering a variety of challenges confronting the armed forces. "It was a very elevated conversation about the situation worldwide and the threats that we face and the risks that exist around the globe," said Geoff Morrell, the Defense Department spokesman.
 
Speaking with reporters afterward, Mr. Obama expressed concern about the "enormous pressure on our military to carry out a whole set of missions" and promised to advance "all aspects of American power to make sure that they're not carrying the full load." He indicated that he had not decided on his approach to Iraq. "We're going to have some difficult decisions that we're going to have to make surrounding Iraq and Afghanistan, most immediately," Mr. Obama said.
 
J. D. Crouch II, who was President Bush's deputy national security adviser and a leading architect of the "surge" strategy, said Mr. Obama and his team would be wise to heed the military. "They don't want Iraq to go bad because they have too many other important things to do," he said. "They don't want to alienate the military. And there's something to be said that the guy who got things under control over there, Ray Odierno, probably has a good idea of what he needs."
 
Yet Mr. Obama faces pressure from his political base to stick to his 16-month timetable. "We voted for him because he's going to get us out of Iraq," said Medea Benjamin, co-founder of Code Pink, an antiwar group. "If there are some military people who feel we should stay there, they're entitled to their opinion, but that shouldn't be our policy."
 
Eli Pariser, executive director of MoveOn.org, another organization that opposes the war, said, "We have no reason to think Obama's backed off his campaign promises on a timeline to end the war." Representative William D. Delahunt, a Democrat from Massachusetts and member of the Out of Iraq Caucus, said that the withdrawal should happen even faster than 16 months and that military commanders knew it could. "When they say it concerns them, there's a certain ‘cover myself' " at work, he said.
 
Others said the timetable was less important than the goal. "It helps for him to aim for it," said Representative Ike Skelton, Democrat of Missouri and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. "If you can draw your troops down to within the ballpark and they're safe, that's what counts."
 
In Jisr Diyala, south of Baghdad, General Odierno traveled in an armored vehicle on Wednesday to inspect preparations for Saturday's voting. He said his focus now was on "drivers of instability" that could halt Iraq's security gains, including Arab-Kurdish friction in northern Iraq and tension between Shiite political parties over the division of power elsewhere in the country.
 
General Odierno said he envisioned a shift in the American mission that would occur in "five or six nodes," where Iraqis and Americans would both have forces working with provincial reconstruction teams, other American Embassy personnel and nongovernmental organizations to help Iraqis mature as a fighting force and gain skills in civilian projects.
 
Eventually, he said, only about one-third of the current 140,000 troops now in Iraq will be needed, but when that will happen has yet to be decided. "That's the decision we have to make is when that happens; when do we go to that level," he said.
 
Under the security agreement approved by Baghdad and Washington before Mr. Obama took office, all United States forces are supposed to leave by the end of 2011 unless requested to stay by the Iraqis — a date confirmed by General Odierno, who said, "By 2011 we'll be zero."
 
"We're making progress every day," General Odierno said. "But I still see some issues that could cause problems that I worry about. Political issues that could turn into security issues. But the longer we go, if we get through the elections, we get closer and closer to not being able to backslide."
 
Peter Baker reported from Washington, and Alissa J. Rubin from Baghdad. Thom Shanker contributed reporting from Washington.
 
Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company
 
Original link
 

 
 
| Ander Nieuws week 6 / nieuwe oorlog 2009 |