Congress still divided on Iraq after testimony

President Bush will address the nation Thursday
regarding the war.

COMBINED DISPATCHES

WASHINGTON — The long-awaited Petraeus report to Congress, aimed at providing answers to the future of American policy in Iraq, has instead left lawmakers more divided than ever.

The two days of testimony by Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker didn’t answer the concerns of those skeptical about the surge and the war or bring the two parties closer together. Most Democrats oppose the administration’s policy while many Republicans have doubts about the war but appear unlikely to join Democrats who want a firm withdrawal date.

As a result, the future of the war — and of congressional action to force a change in U.S. policy — remains as murky as ever. Before the Petraeus report, legislators could at least point to it as possibly offering answers.

“There’s nothing else to wait for,” said Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Mo., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. “What you see is what you get.”

Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, one of the most respected Republicans on foreign policy, said his skepticism about Iraq is as strong as ever — and that he has no surefire answers.

“In my judgment, some type of success in Iraq is possible, but as policymakers, we should acknowledge that we are facing extraordinarily narrow margins for achieving our goals,” Lugar, ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told Petraeus at Tuesday’s hearing.

And Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he’d heard nothing from the two witnesses in terms of “leveling with the American people about when their kids are going to be coming home.”

Different view

Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri, the No. 2 Republican in the House and a strong war backer, accused Democrats of “overplaying their hand” by raising questions about the reliability of Petraeus’ information. Blunt said the testimony left him “hopeful” about the situation in Iraq.

Many Republicans say they’re torn because while the surge of U.S. troops has helped improve security in some parts of Iraq, it hasn’t led to political progress.

“I think people recognize the surge has made a difference, but it hasn’t enabled the Iraqi government to get its act together,” said Rep. Ray LaHood, R-Ill.

With this backdrop, there is no clear path ahead for Congress. Skelton said he hopes President Bush will work with congressional Democrats to achieve a common policy — but the president has continually vowed to veto any measures that tie the hands of military commanders, and Bush’s ability to garner the votes to sustain a veto do not appear to have been lessened by this week’s events.

“We have to get it done — forget politics,” Skelton said.

Bush address

Bush will tell the nation Thursday evening that he plans to reduce the American troop presence in Iraq by as many as 30,000 by next summer but will condition those and further cuts on continued progress.

In a 15-minute address from the White House at 9 p.m. EDT, Bush will endorse the Petraeus’ and Crocker’s recommendations, administration officials said. The White House plans to issue a written status report on the troop buildup Friday, they said.

Sen. Christopher “Kit” Bond, R-Mo., and vice-chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said he remains a strong backer of the war.

“The new counterinsurgency strategy to clear, hold and build has brought Iraqi citizens to our side in the fight against al-Qaida and other Islamic terrorists,” he said.

This week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., signaled a willingness to listen to all proposals for changing U.S. policy, even those that don’t involve setting a deadline for troop withdrawal.

Among legislative proposals are measures to order troop withdrawals to begin this fall but without a clear end point, limiting the mission of U.S. troops or demanding that Bush submit a new war strategy to Congress.