Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

Congress to hear Petraeus on Iraq with eye on U.S. elections

Democrats hope this week's hearings can shift the war's course. GOP wants Clinton, Obama to acknowledge its gains.

By Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor / April 8, 2008

Testimony: Army Gen. David Petraeus (l.) and Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker discussed the 'surge' with Congress in September.

Jason Reed/Reuters



The last time Gen. David Petraeus and US Ambassador Ryan Crocker appeared before a congressional panel, the focus was on the military: Could a "surge" of 30,000 US troops reduce the violence in Iraq? Now, seven months later, the calculations of an election year have intervened.

Skip to next paragraph

As senators and congressmen prepare this week to question the two men in charge of the US effort in Iraq, the focus will become, more overtly than ever, the US presidential and congressional elections this fall. The stakes couldn't be higher.

That's in part because all three major presidential candidates will question General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker. But it's also due to the political strategies of the two parties.

For Democrats, hearings this week set up what is likely to be their last bid to change course in Iraq – and to ensure that the next president doesn't inherit a debacle. "We believe there is still time for you to recognize that a change in strategy is necessary to repair the grave damage done to our nation's security," said senior Democrats in a letter last week to President Bush.

Republicans want to force Democrats, especially the two senators on the front lines of the presidential race, to concede progress on the ground in Iraq – an admission that they say will make it harder to make the case for an early withdrawal.

Both sides are looking to Petraeus and Crocker for help in making their case.

Instead of calling for a timetable for withdrawal, senior Democrats last week rallied around a four-point plan that shifts US presence from a combat role to a posture of "strategic overwatch," a concept they credit to Petraeus.

The aim is to create new incentives for the Iraqis to reach a political settlement, so that the US can substantially reduce troop levels.

Then, Washington can redirect resources to other security challenges, such as restoring the highest state of readiness in the Army and Marine Corps; shifting resources to Afghanistan and Pakistan, where Al Qaeda is reportedly back to prewar strength; and rebuilding regional diplomacy.

"We should not allow this debate to come down to who is controlling what block in what city in Iraq," says Sen. James Webb (D) of Virginia, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, which leads off the week's hearings on Tuesday.

Democrats need to broaden the debate to the regional impact of US strategy in Iraq and its impact on the fight against international terrorism, he says. "Iraq is not an island in the middle of an ocean."