By Douglas Jehl
New York Times
23 June 2005
WASHINGTON - The top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Carl Levin of Michigan, called on Wednesday for a major shift in American policy toward Iraq, saying the administration must hold out the prospect of a major troop withdrawal unless Iraqis meet a self-imposed deadline to agree on a constitution by next February.
Senator Levin outlined the recommendation in an interview a day before Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and top American commanders were to appear before the Senate panel to discuss Iraq.
With President Bush acknowledging that the United States still faces a "long, hard slog in Iraq," Mr. Levin is the latest Democrat to offer his own prescription for a new American approach. But he is highly respected on defense issues, and he said that he was seeking Republican support for what he called an option to an "unacceptable status quo."
"The United States needs to state to Iraqis and the world" that if the February deadline is not met, "we will review our position with all options open, including, but not limited to, setting a timetable for withdrawal," Mr. Levin said. But he made clear that he would oppose calls from other Democrats to set a specific withdrawal deadline now.
Among Republicans, Senators Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and John McCain of Arizona have been sharply critical in recent days of administration statements on Iraq that they have suggested bear little resemblance to the realities on the ground.
Iraq's interim government has approved a timetable calling for the adoption of a constitution by Aug. 15, with the possibility of a single six-month extension, but has made little progress toward that goal. Mr. Levin said he believed that an American signal "that we're not there forever" could help prod Iraqi Shiites, Kurds and Sunnis to reach a deal.
Mr. Levin said he believed that the anti-American insurgency in Iraq could not be defeated with military means, but only through a political solution, an assessment also offered in recent days by top American generals. He said recent pledges by the Bush administration that American troops would remain in Iraq "as long as needed" had left Iraq's three major factions with little incentive to resolve their disagreements.
Mr. Levin's approach would represent a sharper departure from the current administration strategy than an alternative sketched on Tuesday by Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Mr. Biden called on the administration to set new goals for progress in Iraq, and said Congress should hold monthly hearings to assess its compliance with those goals.
In the interview, Mr. Levin acknowledged that his recommendations left open the unpalatable prospect that, by sometime next year, American forces would be withdrawn in large numbers, and that Iraqis would left to fend for themselves. But he said he believed that even that alternative might be better than continuing what he called a failed approach. "The status quo, we know, is violent," he said. "What may happen if we leave is uncertain."
Democratic senators held a closed strategy session on Wednesday afternoon to talk about possible options for policy on Iraq.
Another leading Democratic voice on military matters, Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, urged the administration on Wednesday to provide a more forthright assessment of the long-term budget and personnel costs of the Iraq campaign.
"They have to be much more realistic about the nature of the problems created and difficulty of resolving those problems," Mr. Reed, a West Point graduate and former officer in the 82nd Airborne Division, told a small group of reporters in a telephone interview. "What do they think Iraq will have to look like for U.S. forces to come out? If we're in for a generation, then say it and put the resources behind it."
Mr. Reed concurred with Senator Levin in opposing a specific timetable for withdrawal as counterproductive, and voiced a greater willingness to commit American forces to the Iraq operations than Senator Levin, but only if their missions were specifically detailed.
If conditions on the ground improve in Iraq over the next several months and Iraqi forces assume more responsibility for security duties, then perhaps major American troop reductions are possible early next year, he said. But Mr. Reed said the public should be warned of a longer-term commitment. "We're going to have to be there for a number of months if not years," he said.
Eric Schmitt contributed reporting for this article.
----------------------------------------------------
Citation: Douglas Jehl, " Senator Asks Ultimatum Be Given Iraq on Charter," New York Times, 23 June 2005.
Original URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/23/politics/23military.html?ei=5070&en=a49b9a642c786223&ex=1120190400&pagewanted=print
--------------------------------------------------