Senate Passes Bill Seeking Iraq Exit, Veto Is Expected

By CARL HULSE
Published: April 27, 2007

WASHINGTON, April 26 — The Senate on Thursday sent President Bush a $124 billion war spending measure that he has promised to veto, forcing Democrats to begin confronting the difficult question of what to do after the president acts.


Lawmakers and senior Democratic aides in the House and Senate acknowledge that there is no consensus among the party’s leadership on how to respond legislatively to the veto, with members of the House and Senate advocating competing options and some outside antiwar groups urging the Democrats to hold firm.

“It gives new meaning to the notion of a fluid process,” said Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, after the Senate voted 51 to 46 over serious Republican objections to approve the emergency war measure. Two Republicans joined 48 Democrats and one independent in supporting the bill that would order troops to begin leaving Iraq by Oct. 1 at the latest; 45 Republicans and one independent opposed it.

The White House reaction was swift and harsh. “Eighty days after President Bush submitted his troop funding bill, the Senate has now joined the House in passing defeatist legislation that insists on a date for surrender, micromanages our commanders and generals in combat zones from 6,000 miles away, and adds billions of dollars in unrelated spending to the fighting on the ground,” said Dana Perino, the administration spokeswoman.

With the veto coming, some Democrats argue that the bill should simply be stripped of the timelines that have drawn Mr. Bush’s ire and sent back with the benchmarks and troop readiness rules intact. Others say Congress has made its antiwar statement and should now give the president the money without conditions.

Another wing, including House Democrats who are influential on military policy, prefers providing money for the troops for a few months while keeping pressure on the White House through other Pentagon-related legislation. Still others want to turn the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group into law.

Each alternative carries its own risk because Democratic leaders might not be able to muster the votes for passage of an alternate bill because a substantial bloc of Democrats opposes providing more money without some demand for a withdrawal.

One senior House aide summarized the problem succinctly: The president does not want the bill Democrats have passed, and Democrats might not be able to pass the bill the president wants.

But the Democratic leadership was not ready Thursday to contemplate the tough course ahead in public. With the Senate joining the House in approving the spending bill, Democrats delivered their most significant challenge to Mr. Bush’s Iraq policy since they took power in January after an election that many Democrats saw as a referendum on the president and his handling of the war.

“We have carried forth the wishes of the American people,” said Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Senate Democratic leader.

Recent public opinion polls show the Democrats, with a push for a timeline for leaving Iraq, have struck a chord. A New York Times-CBS News poll found that those surveyed favored a timeline for withdrawal in 2008 by a wide margin, 64 percent to 32 percent. The poll of 1,052 people conducted April 20-24 also found public support for Congress to have the final say on troop levels in Iraq, 57 percent to 35 percent.

The poll also showed that those surveyed said 56 percent to 36 percent that they believed Congress should allow the war money to go forward without timelines once Mr. Bush vetoes the bill.

Senate Republicans called the measure a wasted exercise. Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, the Republican whip, joined the White House in declaring the bill “dead before arrival.”

Others pointed to statements by Gen. David H. Petraeus, the commander in Iraq who met privately with lawmakers on Wednesday, that Al Qaeda is a primary source of violence in Iraq.

“They are attacking Americans,” said Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas. “They are attacking Iraqis. They are trying to take over Iraq so they will have the capability to spread their terrorism throughout the world.”

Democrats said that Republicans were once again trying to tie the terrorism threat to what is predominantly a civil war in Iraq and that a withdrawal there would in fact allow American forces to concentrate better on terrorism.

“Redeploying our troops who are bogged down in the middle of an Iraqi civil war will enable us to refocus on our top national security: the global fight against Al Qaeda and its affiliates,” said Senator Russell D. Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin.

“It is time to come home,” said Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, Democrat of New Jersey.

As they begin to fashion their post-veto strategy, Democrats say they will listen carefully to what Mr. Bush says in rejecting the bill, studying the nuances for negotiating room beyond his call for a spending measure with no restrictions.

Republican leaders in the House and Senate have recently indicated an openness to legislation that contains some form of benchmark to better chart the progress of the Iraqi government.

“There are a number of members of my conference who do think that benchmarks could be helpful, depending upon how they’re crafted,” said Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader. “And that’ll be among the many items we discuss in moving forward and getting the money to the troops as quickly as possible.”

Mr. McConnell said he and Mr. Reid had already had preliminary talks about how to proceed after the veto.

Democrats said Mr. Bush was going to have to engage them as well.

دیدار لاریجانی با سولانا

US General Says Iran-Linked Group Attacked US Troops

By Al Pessin Pentagon 26 April 2007

Pessin report - Download 563k
Listen to Pessin report

The top U.S. commander in Iraq says an Iraqi group affiliated with an elite Iranian force carried out an attack last year in which five U.S. soldiers were killed near the Iraqi town of Karbala. The statement by General David Petraeus follows months of suspicion about Iranian involvement in the incident, but the general says he cannot directly connect Iranian agents to the attack. VOA's Al Pessin reports from the Pentagon.

General David Petraeus at the Pentagon, 26 Apr 2007

General Petraeus told a Pentagon news conference that his conclusion about the Karbala attack comes from the results of interrogations of the leaders of an Iraqi insurgent group affiliated with Iran called the Khazali Network.

"Iranian involvement has really become much clearer to us and come into much more focus during the interrogation of the members, the heads, of the Khazali Network and some of the key members of that network that have been in detention now for a month or more," said General Petraeus.

General Petraeus says the network received money and weapons from Iran, and that some of its members were trained inside Iran. He says a computer captured with some members of the organization contained a document proving its involvement in the Karbala attack, but he says there was no indication that Iranian agents were directly involved.

"We discovered, for example, a 22-page memorandum on a computer that detailed the planning, preparation, approval process and conduct of the operation that resulted in five of our soldiers being killed in Karbala," he said.

In the January incident, insurgents attacked a building in Karbala. One U.S. soldier was killed during the attack and four others were kidnapped. Three were later found handcuffed together and shot to death. The other had a bullet wound in his head and died as U.S. forces were taking him to a hospital.

General Petraeus says the Iraqi group responsible for the attack is linked to Iran's elite Quds Force, which conducts special operations abroad. But he could not say whether senior Iranian leaders are involved in the Iraq operations.

"We do not, at least I do not, know of anything that specifically identifies how high it goes beyond the level of the Quds Force commander Soliman," noted General Petraeus. "Beyond that, it is very difficult to tell. We know where he is in the overall chain of command. He certainly reports to the very top. But, again, nothing that would absolutely indicate, again, how high the knowledge of this actually goes."

General Petraeus also criticized Syria for allowing foreign fighters to enter Iraq through its territory. He says the foreigners carry out 80 to 90 per cent of the suicide bombings in Iraq, which have killed hundreds of Iraqi civilians in recent weeks. The general says al-Qaida organizes those bombings, and he called the group "Public Enemy Number One" in Iraq.

In spite of the bombings, General Petraeus says some progress is being made toward establishing security in Iraq. He cited a sharp drop in sectarian killings in Baghdad, and increased cooperation from Sunni leaders, especially in al-Anbar Province. Still, he acknowledged that U.S. and Iraqi casualties remain high and there is much work to do.

"Because we are operating in new areas, and challenging elements in those areas, this effort may get harder before it gets easier," he said.

The general says the surge of U.S. forces in Iraq will not be completed until mid-June, and he will not be able to make even a preliminary assessment of its success until September.

He said that assessment will be based on the security situation, but also on economic development, progress on key political issues and whether there are improvements in the Iraqi legal system. He also said Shiite militias must be brought under control for Iraq to have long-term stability.

General Petraeus tried to steer clear of the political debate in Washington, in which Congress, under the control of the Democratic Party, is trying to set a timetable for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. But he did answer a question about what might happen in Iraq if a U.S. withdrawal were to begin in October, as the Democrats want.

"My sense is that there would be an increase in sectarian violence, a resumption of sectarian violence, were the presence of our forces and Iraqi forces at that time to be reduced and not to be doing what it is that they are doing right now," said David Petraeus.

He said as bad as the situation in Iraq is now, it could get "much, much worse."

General Petraeus said Washington works on what he called an "American Clock" regarding the Iraq war, a clock that runs fast because of frustration over the length of the conflict and the number of U.S. casualties. He said that, in Baghdad, what he called the "Iraqi Clock" runs more slowly because of the sharp political divisions.