Responsible Redeployment From Iraq Act

Floor Speech

RESPONSIBLE REDEPLOYMENT FROM IRAQ ACT -- (Extensions of Remarks - July 19, 2007)

* Mr. ENGLISH of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, in March 2003 the United States set out, with the overwhelming support of the American people, to remove Saddam Husein from power and establish a stable democracy in Iraq that would no longer threaten our nation or its neighbors. Coalition forces led by the finest military in the world, quickly accomplished the first goal. Unfortunately the conflict did not end at that point.

* Future generations of military scholars will use this administration's conduct of military, diplomatic and reconstruction efforts in Iraq between June 2003 and November 2006 as a case study in how not to fight a war. The American people are justifiably disillusioned with almost every aspect of the conduct of our operations in Iraq for the past four years. The near sole exception to this disappointment is the pride which all Americans share in the dedication, professionalism and sacrifices of our men and women in uniform.

* Time does not permit a full catalogue of errors, nor would a demonstration of 20-20 hindsight provide a positive contribution to this discussion. It is sufficient to recognize that by March 2006 forward thinking members of Congress recognized the need for a change of direction and asked the United States Institute of Peace to form an Iraq Study Group, ISG, to conduct a forward-looking, independent assessment of the current and prospective situation on the ground in Iraq, its impact on the surrounding region, and consequences for U.S. interests.

* On December 6th 2006, the Iraq Study Group presented a report to Congress containing 79 specific recommendations in support of three broad equally important strategies designed to reinforce each other:

* A change in the primary mission of U.S. forces in Iraq that will enable the United States to begin to move its combat forces out of Iraq responsibly.

* Prompt action by the Iraqi government to achieve milestones--particularly on national reconciliation; and

* New and enhanced diplomatic and political efforts in Iraq and the region. Significantly, the ISG specifically rejected proposals for a precipitous withdrawal of U.S. combat forces or a major sustained increase in troop levels.

* Unfortunately; the ISG report recommendations, which I immediately endorsed, was equally immediately rejected by both advocates of withdrawal and proponents of continued engagement. President Bush announced plans to ``surge'' 21,500 combat troops to Iraq and Democrats in Congress announced plans to cut off funding for the troops in the field unless the President agreed to an almost immediate withdrawal. I opposed both of these policies when they were announced, oppose them now and will continue to oppose them in the future.

* President Bush and the Democrats in Congress both need to step back from their respective ideologically driven positions and focus on developing bipartisan legislation, based on recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, that will refocus U.S. operation in Iraq on helping the Iraqi people reconcile with each other and achieve a level of internal security that will make our continued presence unnecessary. We must shift the emphasis of U.S. military efforts from conducting combat operations to training the Iraqi security forces. We must demand that Iraqi government leaders set aside their sectarian differences and cooperate in governing their country for the greater good of all its citizens. Finally, we must work with governments in the region to eliminate the external threats to Iraqi security, particularly the foreign terrorists infiltrating from Syria and Iran.

* Both President Bush and the Democrat leadership have paid lip service to the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group while steadfastly avoiding or actively opposing any effort to actually implement them. In early January 2007 President Bush took a single line in the ISG report regarding possible support for a SHORT TERM redeployment of U.S. combat forces to stabilize Baghdad and used it to justify a long term escalation of troop levels by over 20,000 soldiers. I immediately joined with several of my colleagues in sending a letter to the President expressing our opposition to this policy and shortly thereafter voted in favor of a Congressional resolution disapproving the surge. At almost the same time, the democrats in Congress seized upon another line in the ISG report acknowledging the United States should not make an open-ended commitment to keep large numbers of American troops deployed in Iraq and used it to justify a series of resolutions to cut off funding for the troops in the field. I have voted against each and every one of these efforts.

* Neither President Bush nor the democrats in Congress has ever made any serious effort to implement the ISG recommendations. In fact, the Democrat leadership in the House has consistently used a series of parliamentary maneuvers to prevent the subject from even being discussed. On June 6, 2007, I joined 45 of my colleagues as an original cosponsor of H.R. 2574, legislation to implement the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group. This legislation would establish as United States policy:

* A new diplomatic offensive in the region that includes the creation of the Iraq International Support Group;

* Giving the highest priority to training, equipping and advising the Iraqi military and security forces;

* Assessing the full budgetary and personnel impact of the war in Iraq on the U.S. military;

* Accelerating and increasing oil production and accountability including equitable distribution of oil revenues in Iraq;

* Implementing and oversight of economic reconstruction programs in Iraq with the creation of a new Senior Advisor for Economic Reconstruction;

* Ensuring that the President includes the cost of the war in his annual budget request; and

* Setting conditions that could lead to redeployment of U.S. combat brigades not needed for force protection as early as the first quarter of 2008 if diplomatic, infrastructure and security benchmarks are met.

* Last night I joined with Congressman WOLF to ask the Rules Committee to make in order an amendment that would substitute the proposals in The Iraq Study Group Recommendations Implementation Act for the fatally flawed language in H.R. 2956. On the directions of the Democrat leadership the Rules committee refused to even allow discussion of these proposals by voting 9-4 along party lines to not allow our amendment.

* In the absence of cooperation between President Bush and the democrat leadership in Congress, our enemies have been emboldened and our allies have become discouraged. Sectarian violence continues to plague the Iraqi people. Iranian special operations forces are openly training insurgent forces, Turkey has massed nearly 140,000 troops on Iraq's northern border and Syria continues to serve as a conduit for both illicit arms and foreign fighters. Meanwhile the democratically elected Iraqi government, in which our leaders took such pride just 18 months ago, has degenerated into a state of near paralysis. President Maliki becomes increasingly more marginalized with each passing day. The various ministries are riddled with corruption, incompetence and tribal rivalries. Finally, the Iraqi parliament has become so terrified of retribution they refuse to enact, or even vote on, any legislative proposal that cannot command the support of 100 percent of all sectarian leaders. This is a recipe not for progress but for disaster.

* Under these circumstances, the democrat leaders in Congress bring us a partisan political statement masquerading as a not very substantive legislative proposal. I for one refuse to participate in their tawdry charade and will therefore vote NO on this legislation.

Source