General Petraeus Iraq Hearings: Updates Here

General Petraeus Iraq Hearings: Updates Here

***LAST UPDATED 4/9 1:17pm***

Petraeus Won't Say He'd Advise New President On Withdrawal: Spencer Ackerman catches Gen. Petraeus dodging on a question of how we would advise a new president's plan to withdraw from Iraq:

"I would back up," he said, "and ask what's the mission, what's the desired endstate. And then you advise on resources..." Tauscher said the goal would be to keep the security gains of the surge, fix the readiness problems of the military and cut U.S. costs in Iraq.

"My response would be dialogue on what the risks would be. And, again, this is about risk." Petraeus sounded a lot like he was saying he would not be willing to advise a President Obama or a President Clinton on withdrawal -- something that, unless he was willing to resign, is very Constitutionally dubious.

Resources Versus Condition On The Ground: The Washington Independent reports on a question from Rep. Silvestre Reyes that drives exactly to the problem of maintaining a condition-based strategy:

If Basra or anywhere else gets out of control, would the general recommend "reinstat[ing] the surge?"

Petraeus called that a remote possibility. He made the eyebrow-raising statement that the Iraqis could take care of it. (So why don't we leave now?) More candidly, he led off by saying that broader "strategic" frameworks -- the resurgence of Al Qaeda along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, for instance -- make recommending a renewed increase in troop strength unlikely. Combine that with the acknowledged strain on the military and the surge is almost assuredly over for good.

Except that makes no sense at all if you believe that withdrawal should be "conditions-based."

Lockdown On Baghdad Anniversary Fails To Prevent Violence: Today is the 5-year anniversary of the fall of Baghdad, and the Iraqi government ordered a lockdown of the capitol in an effort to prevent violence from spreading on the anniversary. Attacks continued despite the security measures, Reuters reports:

At least a dozen people were killed in Baghdad's Shi'ite slum of Sadr City on Wednesday, despite vehicle bans aimed at preventing unrest from spreading on the fifth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad.

Police said six people died in clashes overnight, and an explosion in the morning whose cause was unclear hit a funeral inside the eastern Baghdad district that is home to 2 million, killing six more and wounding 14 people.


Petraeus Pushed Harder On Troop Cuts: The Washington Post's Thomas Ricks reports that "the advantage the Senate had at last September's Petraeus-Crocker hearings: It goes second. That means they can try to get beyond the basics that were laid down in yesterday's hearings..."

As predicted, the House Armed Services Committee is pushing Petraeus a little harder on troop cuts. Specifically, when will he begin considering reductions beyond the current ones that between now and this July will take the U.S. back to around the pre-surge level of about 133,000 troops.

"We are already identifying areas" where additional cuts might be made, Petraeus told Rep. Skelton. There are "four or five" such areas, he said.


Petraeus, Crocker Face 2nd Day Of Questioning: General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker face a second day of questions, this time from the House. They are expected to present to the House similar arguments about security gains and troop withdrawals that they presented to the Senate:

The top U.S. officials in Iraq will testify on the war for a second day to Congress on Wednesday as the Bush administration makes its case against a big troop pull-out.

Gen. David Petraeus, the U.S. commander in Iraq, and Ambassador Ryan Crocker will argue the United States risks losing ground to terrorism if it withdraws too many troops out of the war zone too quickly.

Leading Democrats, including the party's contenders in the November presidential election, advocate beginning a process to withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq and to focus more attention on fighting al-Qaida in Afghanistan and Pakistan.


As Petraeus Testifies, Baghdad Teeters On Edge Of Erupting: As Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker spoke, firebrand Shiite cleric Muqtada al Sadr threatened to unleash his Mahdi Army militia against U.S. and Iraqi forces, McClatchy Newspapers reported:

Once again, it was Iran that stepped into the political vacuum and urged a halt to militia attacks into the heavily fortified Green Zone, where U.S. and Iraqi officials, including Petraeus and Crocker, have their offices.

The Iranian foreign ministry called for "restraint and prudence of various Iraqi groups," an implicit rebuke of Sadr, who is living and studying in Iran.


Senator Barbara Boxer On Iraq's Relations With Iran: Sen. Boxer, after telling some noisy protesters to "cool it," sharply questioned General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker about Iraq's relationship with Iran. Boxer observed that Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, "was the first national leader to be given a state reception by Iraq's government," and that Iraq's president and Iran's president "held hands" while Iraq lawmakers lined up to greet him, some even "kissing him on both cheeks."



Senator George Voinovich On Iraq War Sacrifices: Sen Voinovich heatedly informed General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker that "we haven't sacrificed one darn bit, in this war...we've never been asked to pay a dime, except for the people we've lost."



While Petraeus Testifies, U.S. Iraq Personnel Take Cover: David Corn reports at Mother Jones that American staff in the Green Zone have been placed under heightened security due to recent attacks:

Under this new security boost, says a U.S. Embassy official who asked not to be identified, embassy personnel have been told to remain under "hardened cover." Instructed to avoid their trailers, some embassy staffers are now sleeping in their offices and on cots in the new embassy building, currently under construction, according to a source who has spoken with embassy officials in Baghdad. Embassy personnel have also been cautioned to limit their trips outdoors and, when they must leave the protection of reinforced structures, to wear flak jackets, protective eyewear, and helmets.

Democratic Senator Evan Bayh Cautions Against "Taking Marching Orders From Osama bin Laden: HuffPost's Jason Linkins reports:

Soft-spoken Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) may have been the last questioner of this morning's hearings on Iraq, but he ended up being a highlight of the hearings, deftly making his points on "opportunity costs" and the increasing demands of Afghanistan against a flummoxed Ambassador Ryan Crocker. Unable to make any sort of cogent point to rebut Bayh's intimations, Crocker ineptly attempted to raise Osama bin Laden as a spectre of fear, telling Bayh, "I noted in my testimony that Osama bin Laden fairly recently referred to Iraq as the perfect base for al Qaeda and it is a reminder that for al Qaeda, having a safe base on Arab soil is extremely important today."

Bayh's response: "I appreciate your responses. And I would only caution us to not take our marching orders from Osama bin Laden."



Poll: Highest Ever Support For Iraq Withdrawal Within A Year: A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 65% of Americans would like to see U.S. troops brought home from Iraq within a year. That's the highest total recorded in the tracking poll which has been conducted regularly since August of last year. The 65% total is up six points from two weeks ago, but just a single point higher than the total from a month ago.

Twenty-six percent (26%) want the troops brought home immediately, up three points from the last survey.

Read more here.


Protester Interrupts Hearing: As Gen. Petraeus fielded questions, a lone protester interrupted him, screaming, "Bring them home!" over and over. Clapping and quiet cheers can be heard as the man is escorted out of the room.


HuffPost's Jason Linkins has more here.


Committee Chairman Levin Criticizes Bush For Ignoring Military Leaders: Senator Levin (D) harshly criticized President Bush for ignoring reports from his own military leaders who concluded "intransigence of Iraq's Shiite-dominated government is the key threat facing the United States' effort in Iraq, rather than Al Qaeda terrorists, Sunni insurgents or Iranian-backed militias."



McCain Wants To Avoid Looking Like "Eager Cheerleader": The New York Times notes that John McCain "risks looking like an eager cheerleader if he heaps too many accolades on General Petraeus." So the senator's advisers "say he will also question the general closely about the recent assault against Shiite militias in Basra, when more than 1,000 Iraqi soldiers and police officers refused to fight or abandoned their posts. The battle cast doubt on the effectiveness of the American-trained security forces, another likely line of questioning for Mr. McCain, as it was in September."


While Petraeus Prepares To Testify, Violence Erupts: Some news clips from this morning:

Reuters: "Iraq attacks up as U.S. officials to testify-- Attacks on U.S. and Iraqi forces in Baghdad increased sharply in March, the U.S. military said on Tuesday."

LA Times: Fighting intensifies in Iraq's capital: Three U.S. troops are killed in Baghdad on the eve of Gen. David H. Petraeus' testimony before Congress-- Three more U.S. troops were killed Monday as Iraqis struggled to bury their dead amid fierce street battles between Shiite Muslim militias and Iraqi and American soldiers in the nation's capital.

New York Times: Crackdown on Militias Raises Stability Concerns -- A crackdown on the Mahdi Army militia is creating potentially destabilizing political and military tensions in Iraq, pitting a stronger government alliance against the force that has won past showdowns: the street power wielded by the radical cleric Moktada al-Sadr.


Democrats Question Spending Billions On Iraq Reconstruction: Democrats have taken aim at the billions of dollars the US is spending on Iraq reconstruction when high oil prices should produce record oil revenues for the Iraqi government:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders are saying that Iraq's government needs to spend more of its own money on reconstruction now that the United States has spent more than $45 billion. Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., says future U.S. reconstruction payments should be in the form of loans, not grants -- resurrecting a proposal that died in the Republican-controlled Congress at the start of the war five years ago.

Nelson, a member of the Senate committee that oversees spending legislation, says it's not fair for the United States to pay for reconstruction when Iraq's oil revenue could be $60 billion or more this year because of record prices. Nelson said he planned to offer an amendment to the Iraq spending bill that would require Iraq to pay back future reconstruction aid as well as money approved by Congress but not yet spent.


More Time For More Of The Same?: The New York Times editorializes whether or not the hearings will offer more of the same:

Americans this week get another chance to take stock of President Bush's war-without-end in Iraq. Gen. David Petraeus, the military commander in Baghdad, has already signaled his bottom line: there should be a pause in the withdrawal of American troops.

We're not sure which specific argument the general will make: there is too much progress for American troops to leave now -- or not enough. Either way, it is clear that neither he nor Mr. Bush have a strategy for ending America's disastrous involvement in Iraq.


Shiite Cleric al-Sadr Threatens To End Cease-Fire: Just hours before General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker were to testify in front of Congress, al-Sadr threatened to end his cease-fire with the Iraqi government, which could lead to renewed spike in violence:

Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr threatened on Tuesday to end a truce he imposed on his militia last year, raising the prospect of worsening violence just hours before top U.S. officials testified on Iraq in Washington.

Sadr urged his Mehdi Army to "continue your jihad and resistance" against U.S. forces, although he did not spell out if this was an explicit call for attacks on American soldiers.

His warning came a day after Shi'ite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki threatened to bar Sadr's movement from political life unless the anti-American cleric disbanded his militia.


Little Hope For Improved Security Before New President In '09: Reuters reports that Petraeus will offer little hope for improved security before a new president is sworn in in January:

The top U.S. commander in Iraq presents a long-awaited progress report to Congress on Tuesday but will offer little hope for improved security before a new American president takes over in January.

All three contenders for the U.S. presidency will be among the senators questioning Gen. David Petraeus, who is expected to say he will interrupt a series of troop withdrawals in July to evaluate security conditions.


Iraq Hearings Become Forum For Presidential Candidates: The AP reports that David Petraeus' testimony before Congress on the effectiveness of the surge gives the presidential candidates an opportunity to offer their own analysis:

When Army Gen. David Petraeus delivers his assessment of the Iraq war next week, the next commander in chief will weigh in as well.

Republican Sen. John McCain will get a chance to argue that last year's U.S. troop buildup has been a success and withdrawal would be a mistake. Democratic Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama will have an opportunity to ask why the United States is still fighting more than five years after the invasion.

Keep reading here.


Iraq And Reality: The Nation lists 5 important realities to keep in mind during Petraeus' testimony:

1. The situation in Iraq is getting worse: Don't believe anyone who says otherwise. The surge-ified, "less violent" Iraq the general has presided over so confidently is, in fact, a chaotic, violent tinderbox of city states, proliferating militias armed to the teeth, competing regions armed to the teeth, and competing religious factions armed to the teeth. Worse yet, under Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker, the U.S. has been the great proliferator. It has armed and funded close to 100,000 Sunnis organized into militias reportedly intent on someday destroying "the Iranians" (i.e. the Maliki government)...

2. The Bush administration has no learning curve. Its top officials are unable to absorb the realities of Iraq (or the region) and so, like the generals of World War I, simply send their soldiers surging "over the top" again and again, with minor changes in tactics, to the same dismal end.

Keep reading here.


A Timeline Of Iraq War And Troop Levels: Troop levels will be a contentious issue during the hearings as fears grow that our military has been overextended by the surge. The AP has a timeline of the major events in the Iraq war and corresponding U.S. troop levels:

March 2003 _ U.S. troops invade Iraq: 192,000.

May 2003 _ President Bush declares the end of major combat: 146,000.

January 2005 _ First post-invasion Iraqi election: 159,000.

October 2005 _ Iraqi referendum on the constitution: 157,000.

December 2005 _Iraqi parliamentary elections: 152,000.

June 2006 _ Lowest troop level since July 2004: 125,000.

September 2006 _ Escalating insurgent violence: 147,000.

January 2007 _ Bush announces troop "surge" plan: 137,000.

October 2007 _Troop buildup peaks: 170,000.

March 2008 _ U.S. troop deaths reach 4,000: 158,000.


The Violence In Basra
: TIME magazine's Joe Klein writes that an important thing to watch for is if Petraeus has the same reading as McCain does on the violence in Shiite-dominated Basra:

One of the key things to watch is if Petraeus reads Basra the same way as John McCain did today on Fox news:

"It was al-Sadr that declared the ceasefire, not Maliki," said McCain. "With respect, I don't think Sadr would have declared the ceasefire if he thought he was winning. Most times in history, military engagements, the winning side doesn't declare the ceasefire. The second point is, overall, the Iraqi military performed pretty well. ... The military is functioning very effectively."

This is a fundamental misreading of Sadr's aim and of the situation. McCain seems to think that Sadr--who didn't start the fight--has a military goal in the south. On the contrary, Sadr's goal is political: he--or the political experts in the Sadrist movement--hope to do very well in the local elections next October. The Sadrist goal is to hold on to the neighborhoods they control, so their vote won't be stolen (and so they can do unto Dawa and ISCI electorally in those neighborhoods that which theyDawa and ISCI want to do unto them).

Keep reading here.

McCain also delivered a speech about Iraq in advance of Petraeus' testimony. Here is an excerpt:

But there is no doubt about the basic reality in Iraq: we are no longer staring into the abyss of defeat, and we can now look ahead to the genuine prospect of success. Success in Iraq is the establishment of a generally peaceful, stable, prosperous, democratic state that poses no threat to its neighbors and contributes to the defeat of terrorists. It is the advance of religious tolerance over violent radicalism. It is a level of security that allows the Iraqi authorities to govern, the average person to live a normal life, and international entities to operate. It is a situation in which the rule of law, after decades of tyranny, takes hold. It is an Iraq where Iraqi forces have the responsibility for enforcing security in their country, and where American troops can return home, with the honor of having secured their country's interests at great personal cost, and helping another people achieve peace and self-determination.

Read the full speech here.


It's Not All About The Candidates: While most of the focus will be on the presidential candidates, the Politico reminds us "that there are other aspects of the hearing worth watching for":

How will the parties spin the issues?

How will Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.) use his first big public stage as the new Foreign Affairs chairman?

What have House leaders learned from the last round of Petraeus-Crocker hearings?

And what will CodePink and MoveOn do this time around?

Keep reading here.


The President And His General: Democrats will likely question Petraeus very closely on whether he has been willing to give Bush information that is contrary to Bush's upbeat assessments of Iraq's security situation. As the Washington Post reports, Bush has given Petraeus a privileged voice among his military advisers:

In the waning months of his administration, Bush has hitched his fortunes to those of his bookish four-star general, bypassing several levels of the military chain of command to give Petraeus a privileged voice in White House deliberations over Iraq, according to current and former administration officials and retired officers. In so doing, Bush's working relationship with his field commander has taken on an intensity that is rare in the history of the nation's wartime presidents.

Bush's reliance on Petraeus has made other military officials uneasy, has rankled congressional Democrats and has created friction that helped spur the departure last month of Adm. William J. "Fox" Fallon, who, while Petraeus's boss as chief of U.S. Central Command, found his voice eclipsed on Iraq.

Keep reading here.


Where The Money Could Have Gone: Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office has calculated that the U.S. spends about $339 million a day in Iraq. Ahead of Petraeus' testimony, the Speaker has released a list of what we could have used that money for:

- 2,060 more Border Patrol agents could be hired to protect our borders for a year.

- 18,000 more students could receive Pell Grants to help them attend college for a year.

- 48,000 homeless veterans could be provided with a place to live for a year.

- 317,000 more kids could receive every recommended vaccination for a year.

- 955,000 families could get help with their energy bills through the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) for a year.

Keep reading here.


McCain's Allies Go On Offense: Senators Joe Lieberman and Lindsay Graham, two of McCain's chief allies in the Senate, took to the Op-Ed page of the Wall Street Journal to promote their version of Iraq's situation the day before Petraeus's testimony:

When Gen. David Petraeus testifies before Congress tomorrow, he will step into an American political landscape dramatically different from the one he faced when he last spoke on Capitol Hill seven months ago.

This time Gen. Petraeus returns to Washington having led one of the most remarkably successful military operations in American history. His antiwar critics, meanwhile, face a crisis of credibility - having confidently predicted the failure of the surge, and been proven decidedly wrong.

Keep reading here.

Needless to say, there are others with a different assessment of Iraq's current situation ahead of Petraeus' testimony:

When Gen. David H. Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker brief Congress this week, they will be hard-pressed to depict Iraq as moving toward stability in the wake of recent violence that sent deaths soaring to their highest level in seven months.

Prime Minister Nouri Maliki's move against Shiite Muslim militias has revealed the gravity of the country's Shiite rivalries, just as U.S. forces are decreasing their presence.

The intense combat in southern Iraq that pitted Shiite cleric Muqtada Sadr's Mahdi Army against Iraqi and American forces has largely wound down for the time being, but the enmity that fueled it remains. Fighting between the two sides flared Sunday in Baghdad, leaving as many as 22 dead...

..."We are now locked in a battle," said a high-ranking Iraqi government official, who predicted more confrontations in the coming months. "I think this will be a hot summer in Iraq."

Popular in the Community


What's Hot