EDITORIAL: Democrats Walk a Tight Rope in Criticisms of President’s New Plan for Troops in Iraq

By The Morning Call, Allentown, Pa.

Jan. 9–As President Bush prepares to address the nation tomorrow night about changes in his policy in Iraq, the Democratic majority on Capitol Hill is airing its concerns. But Democrats in the House and Senate walk a tightrope as they criticize the anticipated increase of up to 20,000 additional U.S. troops. Democrats must avoid words that could be construed as anti-military. Support for the troops must not waver.

Certainly, voters in the November mid-term election tried to shake up the status quo in Washington and, it can be surmised, sought a new direction in Iraq. The war is in its fourth year and more than 3,000 members of the U.S. military have given their lives there, not to mention the deaths of our allies, Iraqi troops and civilians. Meanwhile, Congress has approved about $500 billion for Iraq, Afghanistan and other anti-terrorism efforts, and the White House plans to ask for at least $100 billion as part of the President’s Feb. 5 budget.

Also, the distinguished, bipartisan Iraq Study Group released a report after the midterm election, saying the United States should offer Iraq more economic, military and diplomatic support only if the government in Baghdad could control factional fighting. Otherwise, the ISG said, the United States should gradually reduce its aid, in addition to redeploying most allied combat brigades by the first quarter of 2008.

But apparently, that’s not what the President has in mind. Analysts anticipate something similar to a study at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, that has called for a “surge” of troops in Iraq. So, new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said over the weekend that Democrats would support an increase in overall military size “to protect the American people against any threats to our interests” and would not reduce money for troops already in Iraq. However, she said, Democrats won’t give the President a blank check for an open-ended commitment — nor should they. Somewhere between the former no-questions-asked support and budget actions that would weaken the Pentagon is the right balance.

Rep. Pelosi and new Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, sent a letter to the President, urging him to not increase troop levels in Iraq. “Adding more combat troops will only endanger more Americans and stretch our military to the breaking point,” they said, “for no strategic gain.”

Though not all Democrats agree, it helps launch a dialogue expected to continue through new hearings on Capitol Hill related to President Bush’s personnel changes, including Lt. Gen. David H. Petraeus to succeed Gen. George W. Casey Jr. as the commander in Iraq and Ryan Crocker to succeed Zalmay Khalilzad as U.S. ambassador to Iraq.

The President, of course, could make changes whose ultimate outcomes will be handled by his successor. His decisions not only will have an impact on Iraq, they will influence the outcome of the 2008 race for the White House.

—–

Copyright (c) 2007, The Morning Call, Allentown, Pa.

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Business News.

For reprints, email tmsreprints@permissionsgroup.com, call 800-374-7985 or 847-635-6550, send a fax to 847-635-6968, or write to The Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave., Suite 303, Glenview, IL 60025, USA.