Hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee - The Situation in Iraq and Progress by the Government of Iraq in Meeting Benchmarks and Achieving Reconciliation
Copyright ©2008 by Federal News Service, Inc., Ste. 500, 1000 Vermont Ave, Washington, DC 20005 USA. Federal News Service is a private firm not affiliated with the federal government. No portion of this transcript may be copied, sold or retransmitted without the written authority of Federal News Service, Inc. Copyright is not claimed as to any part of the original work prepared by a United States government officer or employee as a part of that person's official duties. For information on subscribing to the FNS Internet Service at www.fednews.com, please email Carina Nyberg at cnyberg@fednews.com or call 1-202-216-2706.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R-AZ): Well, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome back to our two distinguished witnesses.
We've come a long way since early 2007 and quite a distance, even, since General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker appeared before our committee last September. We owe these two patriotic Americans a debt of gratitude for their selfless service to our country.
At the beginning of last year, we were engaged in a great debate about what to do in Iraq. Four years of mismanaged war had brought us almost to the point of no return. Sectarian violence in Iraq was spiraling out of control. Life had become a struggle for survival. And a full-scale civil war seemed almost unavoidable. Al Qaeda in Iraq was on the offensive and entire Iraqi provinces were under the control of extremists.
And yet, rather than retreat from Iraq and face thereby the terrible consequences that would ensue, we chose to change strategies, try to turn things around. Instead of abandoning Iraq to civil war, genocide and terror, and the Middle East to the destabilizing effects of these consequences, we changed the strategy and sent additional troops to carry it out. And by the time our two witnesses testified in September, it had become clear that these new efforts were succeeding.
Since the middle of last year, sectarian and ethnic violence, civilian deaths and deaths of coalition forces have all fallen dramatically. This improved security environment has led to a new opportunity, one in which average Iraqis can in the future approach a more normal political and economic life. Reconciliation has moved forward. And over the weekend, Sunni, Shi'a and Kurdish leaders backed by the prime -- backed the prime minister in a statement supporting his operation in Basra and urging the disbandment of all militias.
Much, much more needs to be done. And Iraq's leaders need to know that we expect them to show the necessary leadership to rebuild their country, for only they can. But today it is possible to talk with real hope and optimism about the future of Iraq and the outcome of our efforts there.
But while the job of bringing security to Iraq is not finished, as the recent fighting in Basra and elsewhere vividly demonstrated, we're no longer staring into the abyss of defeat and we can now look ahead to the genuine prospect of success. Success, the establishment of a peaceful, stable, prosperous, democratic state that poses no threats to its neighbors and contributes to the defeat of terrorists, this success is within reach. And with success, Iraqi forces can take responsibility for enforcing security in their countries, and American troops can return home with the honor of having secured their country's interests at great personal costs and of helping another people achieve peace and self-determination.
That's what I hope every American desires for our country in our mission in Iraq. Yet should the United States instead choose to withdraw from Iraq before adequate security is established, we will exchange for this victory a defeat that is terrible and long-lasting. Al Qaeda in Iraq would proclaim victory and increase its efforts to provoke sectarian tensions, pushing for a full-scale civil war that could descend into genocide and destabilize the Middle East. Iraq would become a failed state. It could become a haven for terrorists to train and plan their operations. Iranian influence would increase substantially in Iraq and encourage other countries to seek accommodation with Tehran at the expense of our interests.
An American failure would almost certainly require us to return to Iraq or draw us into a wider and far, far costlier war. If, on the other hand, we and the Iraqis are able to build on the opportunity provided by recent successes, we have the chance to leave in Iraq a force for stability and freedom, not conflict and chaos. In doing so, we will --
AUDIENCE MEMBERS: (Off mike.)
SEN. LEVIN: (Sounds gavel.) We're going to ask you, please, to sit down. No more demonstrations, or if there is another one, we're going to have to ask our Capitol Police to remove any demonstrations.
SEN. MCCAIN: I have had this experience previously, Mr. Chairman. (Laughs.)
If, on the other hand, we and the Iraqis are able to build on the opportunity provided by recent successes, we have the chance to leave in Iraq a force for stability and freedom, not conflict and chaos. In doing so, we will ensure that the terrible price we have paid in the war, a price that has made all of us sick at heart, has not been paid in vain. Our troops can leave behind a successful mission, and our nation can leave behind a country that contributes to the security of America and the world.
To do this, we must continue to help the Iraqis protect themselves against the terrorists and the insurgents. We must press ahead against al Qaeda, the radical Shi'ite militias -- Shi'a militias, and the Iranian-backed special groups. We must continue to support the Sunni volunteers, the Iraqi Awakening, as they stand up to al Qaeda in Iraq.
And we must continue to build the capacity of the Iraqi security forces, so they can play an ever stronger and more neutral role in suppressing violence. This means rejecting, as we did in 2007, the calls for a reckless and irresponsible withdrawal of our forces at the moment when they are succeeding.
I do not want to keep our troops in Iraq a minute longer than necessary to secure our interest there. Our goal, my goal, is an Iraq that no longer needs American troops. And I believe we can achieve that goal, perhaps sooner than many imagine. But I also believe that the promise of withdrawal of our forces, regardless of the consequences, would constitute a failure of political and moral leadership.
Achieving our goals in Iraq will require much more than a military effort. The Arab neighbors should increase their investment and engagement, including an overdue dispatch of ambassadors to Baghdad. We should encourage greater United Nations involvement, building on the work its representatives have done on the Kirkuk issue.
The Iraqis must continue the reconciliation that has helped dampen violence over recent months. And they need to move a portion of their growing budget surpluses into job creation programs, move toward an end to their reliance on outside sources of aid and look for other ways to take on more of the financial burdens currently borne by American taxpayers. This is especially important as the government of Iraq continues to take in revenues it finds difficult to disburse through its own government channels.
One way they might begin to do this is by contributing significantly to the Commanders Emergency Response Program, CERP, which pays for employment and reconstruction projects throughout the country. This is a start. Other programs of this type can and should be funded by the Iraqis themselves.
By giving our men and women in uniform the time and support necessary to succeed in Iraq, we have before us a hard road. It is a privilege beyond measure to live in a country served so well by these individuals. The sacrifices made by these patriots and their families are incredibly great. Yet the alternative path is, in the end, the far costlier one.
As we convene this hearing and as we continue to debate our future in Iraq, Americans continue to risk everything -- everything -- to accomplish their mission on our behalf. With the untold costs of their failure and the benefits offered by success, the Congress must not choose to lose in Iraq. We should choose instead to succeed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R-AZ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
General Petraeus, again, news reports said that Prime Minister Maliki only informed you shortly before the operation -- is that correct -- in Basra?
GEN. PETRAEUS: It is, Senator. We had a heads-up in a Friday night meeting where we in fact were planning to resource operations in Basra on a longer-term basis. The following Saturday we had a meeting during which he laid out the plan that he was going to deploy forces, laid out the objectives, the lines of operations that he was going to operate along, and stated that he was moving there on Friday himself -- or on Monday himself.
SEN. MCCAIN: And it was not something that you had recommended.
GEN. PETRAEUS: It was not something I recommended, no, sir.
SEN. MCCAIN: News reports indicate that over a thousand Iraqi army and police deserted or underperformed during that operation. This is four months after Basra achieved provincial Iraqi control, meaning that all provincial security had been transferred to Iraqi security forces. What's the lesson that we're to draw from that, that a thousand Iraqi army and police deserted or underperformed?
SEN. MCCAIN: Well, one lesson, Senator, is that relatively new forces -- what happened was in one case a brigade that literally had just come out of unit set fielding was pressed into operation.
The other lesson is a recurring one, and that is the difficulty of local police operating in areas where there is serious intimidation of themselves and of their families.
SEN. MCCAIN: Suffice to say, it was a disappointment.
GEN. PETRAEUS: It was, although it is not over yet, Senator. In fact, subsequent to the early days, they then took control of the security at the different ports. They continued to carry out targeted raids. The operation is still very much ongoing and it is by no means over.
SEN. MCCAIN: The Green Zone has been attacked in ways that it has not been for a long time, and most of that is coming from elements that leave Sadr City or from Sadr City itself. Is that correct?
GEN. PETRAEUS: That's correct, Senator.
SEN. MCCAIN: And what are we going to do about that?
GEN. PETRAEUS: Well, we have already taken control of the area that was the principal launching point for a number of the 107- millimeter rockets into Baghdad and have secured that area. Beyond that -- again, Iraqi security forces are going to have to come to grips both politically as well as militarily with the issue of the militia and more importantly the special groups.
SEN. MCCAIN: What do you make of Sadr's declaration of a quote, "cease-fire?"
GEN. PETRAEUS: Well, as with the cease-fire that was proclaimed in the wake of the militia violence in Karbala in August of last year, it is both to avoid further damage to the image of the Sadr movement, which of course is supposed to care for the downtrodden and has a heavy -- obviously, is a religiously inspired movement, but which has been hijacked in some cases by militias. And in fact, other elements have used it to cloak their activities as well.
If I could, Senator, also point out that along with the operations in Basra there were operations in a number of other provinces in southern Iraq, all precipitated by this outbreak in militia violence. Karbala, Najaf, Qadisiyah, Hillah, Wasat, Dhi Qar and Muthanna -- the Iraqi security forces actually did well, in some cases, did very well and maintained security. The same is true in Baghdad, although again, even there the performance was uneven in some cases.
SEN. MCCAIN: There are numerous threats to security in Iraq and the future of Iraq. Do you still view al Qaeda in Iraq as a major threat?
GEN. PETRAEUS: It is still a major threat, though it is certainly not as major a threat as it was, say, 15 months ago.
SEN. MCCAIN: Certainly not an obscure sect of the Shi'ites, all overall, or Sunnis or anybody else.
GEN. PETRAEUS: No. No, sir.
SEN. MCCAIN: Al Qaeda continues to try to assert themselves in Mosul, is that correct?
GEN. PETRAEUS: It is, Senator. As you saw on the chart, the area of operation of al Qaeda has been greatly reduced in terms of controlling areas that it controlled as a little as a year and a half ago. But clearly, Mosul and Nineveh province are areas that al Qaeda is very much trying to hold on to.
All roads lead through the traditional capital of the north.
SEN. MCCAIN: They continue to be a significant threat.
GEN. PETRAEUS: They do. Yes, sir.
SEN. MCCAIN: Ambassador Crocker, let's -- on your statement, you talked about a long-term relationship with Iraq, such as a security arrangement, diplomatic, et cetera, economic that we have with some 80 countries. You envision this after we succeed in this conflict. Is that correct? Or would you talk a little bit about that, elaborate a little more.
AMB. CROCKER: Yes, sir. I would actually envision it as helping us to succeed in the conflict. The effort will have two elements. One will be a status of forces agreement. That will be, as I said, approximately like what we have with 80 other countries. It will have some unique aspects to give our forces the authorities to continue operations after the end of 2008.
There will also be a broad strategic framework agreement first called for by the Iraqi leadership last August and then reflected in the declaration of principles that Prime Minister Maliki and President Bush signed in November. This will cover, in addition to security, the political, the economic, the cultural -- the whole spectrum of our relations.
SEN. MCCAIN: Thank you.
Finally, General Petraeus, Mosul continue to be a battle. Is that correct?
GEN. PETRAEUS: It does, Senator.
SEN. MCCAIN: And who are the major adversaries in Mosul? It's a mixed population.
GEN. PETRAEUS: The major adversaries are al Qaeda Iraq, Ansar al-Sunna, Jaish al-Islami, and some related Sunni extremist organizations that all are allies of al Qaeda Iraq.
SEN. MCCAIN: It was once said that al Qaeda cannot succeed without control of Baghdad, and they can't survive without control of Mosul. Is that an oversimplification?
GEN. PETRAEUS: A little bit, but not completely, sir. Again, it would be a significant blow to al Qaeda. And in fact, the degree to which they're fighting reflects how much they want to retain the amount of presence that they have in the greater Mosul area.
SEN. MCCAIN: Finally, I hope in response, because my time has expired, we could talk a little bit more about the Iranian threat, particularly their stepped up support of various elements that are Shi'ite extremists in Iraq, particularly the role they played in Basra as well as the southern part of the country.
I used up my time. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source