Kerry: If You Can't Get Reconciliation With More Troops, How Can You Get Them With Less?

[Mass]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/08/politics/politico/thecrypt/main4002490.shtml

(The Politico) Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) pushed Petraeus on one of the most important problems facing the Bush administration in dealing with Iraq's future - how can political reconciliation be achieved in Iraq between warring Sunni, Shia and Kurdish factions when the United States is reducing the number of its troops there to "pre-surge" levels?

Petraeus did not answer the question, and he and Kerry got diverted into a discussion of the whether the United States "was renting" Sunni support by paying the Sons of Iraq and other groups with significant Sunni members.

Crocker spoke about "bottom up" compromises shifting to Baghdad as a result of compromises reached between competing factions at the local and regional level, which then allows national leaders to reach political deals.

The significance of Kerry's question may be missed by some commentators, but both Petraeus and Crocker clearly recognized its significance.

[blm]

1. wow....someone in the newsmedia noticed. Does GD have this?

.

[wisteria]

2. Excellent point made by Senator Kerry. n/t

[JI7]

3. i was away and listened on the radio, i got the same sense from Kerry and Obama

during their questioning. you can tell Petraeus also may see and think what Kerry's point is but is trying to avoid admitting it. or just divert as the article says.

Barbara Boxer also exposed the bs about the surge working and any thought that it could be a victory.

[Fabio]

4. I actually think JK should be careful here.

A main pillar of logic for his withdrawal/force reduction plan is to force the iraqis to reconcile by saying "we are out of here" and you cant bide your time anymore.

He's right to ask GP and AB this, but it could be seen as counter his previous logic.

I suppose the answer to this would have been about the efficacy of the Iraqi Security forces -- but with the backdrop of the Basra operation, they are lucky they got off the hook.

[Luftmensch067]

5. I may not be understanding you

But are you saying that the counterlogic would be that JK has previously suggested drawing down forces in order to impel the Iraqi government and factions to get their house in order and therefore it might be seen as contradictory for him to question the reduction of troop levels?

If so, I never feel sure I'm representing JK's plan perfectly correctly, but I always thought that he was suggesting intelligent redeployment as part of his reduction strategy and that therefore there would be a clear difference between his plan of keeping a reduced number of specific kinds of troops in specific capacities and what sounds to me like the current plan of just sending a certain number of troops home. In my view, JK's logic is consistent because he has continuously stressed reducing numbers, but only if it's done with a very focused strategic goal that maximizes their usefulness and in conjunction with a very strong diplomatic effort. There was clear skepticism on how focused the "diplomatic surge" being touted is and that is also a clear difference to JK's plan.

I'm always trying to understand this better, so I welcome corrections!

[Fabio]

6. I think you got it but I dont think the military is planning

on randomly lowering troop levels or lowering them across the board. GP actually does address JK's question later in the testimony saying that the current force reductions (to pre-surge levels) are occurring mostly in Al Anbar, where the number of battalions has been reduced by something like half -- predicated on INF taking over.

[Luftmensch067]

7. Aha -- that's the part I need to understand better!

Still haven't watched all the testimony -- will check out that bit, thanks!

[karynnj]

8. Wouldn't the counter to that logic be

what Kerry has always said that the main lever had to be the firm statement that our presence was finite which did not happen? The obvious answer to Kerry's question exposes that using a high number of troops (the surge) to create stability alone will not work. I take his comment as leading to the conclusion that the surge is a failed policy.