War resolution could expose Republican divide on Iraq
A Democrat-driven resolution on Iraq that has attracted the support of at least two Republicans threatens to expose fissures within US President George Bush’s party over the unpopular war.
Republicans are deeply divided on the war in Iraq and how Congress should react to Bush’s plan to send 21,500 more troops to join the estimated 130,000 already there.
Ten Republicans met behind closed doors last night with Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell in a bid to generate consensus on Iraq. The senators emerged from the meeting to announce that no deal had been reached.
“This is a very fluid situation,” said Republican Senator Jon Kyl.
The meeting came after Senators Chuck Hagel and Olympia Snowe, both Republicans who have sparred with the administration on the war, announced that they would co-sponsor the resolution.
The resolution would put the senate on record as opposed to sending more troops to Iraq.
It also calls for the US military mission to switch from major combat to training Iraqi troops, counterterrorism and keeping foreign fighters out of Iraq.
“It is not in the national interest of the US to deepen its military involvement in Iraq, particularly by escalating the US military force presence in Iraq,” the resolutions states.
Hagel, a possible presidential contender in 2008 who helped draft the proposal with Democratic Senators Joe Biden and Carl Levin, called the resolution a “genuine bipartisan effort”.
However, some Republicans denounced the proposal as a political ploy to embarrass the president.
Senator John Cornyn, a Bush supporter, predicted the resolution would fail.
“If my Democrat colleagues are truly opposed to the mission in Iraq, then as the new majority in Congress they should schedule a serious debate and a vote on cutting off funding for our troops,” said Cornyn, a Republican from Bush’s home state of Texas.
Hagel shot back: “To somehow come up with a conclusion that it shows a lack of seriousness, I am a bit befuddled by what the Texas senator is trying to describe.”
The resolution does not call for a withdrawal of troops or threaten funding of military operations.
Instead, it says the US should transfer responsibility to the Iraqis ”under an appropriately expedited timeline” that is not specified.
Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said his panel will debate the measure on January 24, the day following Bush’s State of the Union address.
A swift committee review would pave the way for debate on the floor as early as that week, although Democrats say it is likely Republicans on the committee will want to make changes.
Biden said modest changes to the bill might be used “to attract those who share our view but may not like our specific language”.
Bush sought to stave off a major showdown between the administration and congress on Iraq by inviting Republican sceptics of the plan to the White House yesterday.
Many of those members emerged from the meeting to say they still opposed sending more troops, although they were unsure whether they would back the resolution.
Senator Norm Coleman, one of several Republicans wary of Bush’s plan, said he is concerned the resolution may go too far. Coleman spokesman Tom Steward said the senator is open to an increase in the Anbar province, for example.
“Senator Coleman has repeatedly conveyed his specific concerns to the president and is hopeful that congress can find bipartisan common ground on this resolution going forward,” Steward said.
Alternative proposals have already begun to surface. House Republican leaders backed a bill that would protect funding for US troops, while senate Republicans prepared a resolution supportive of Bush’s strategy.
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said that resolution would say the senate believes the war in Iraq cannot be lost “and this strategy could bring about success if properly supported”.
Senator John Warner is considering an alternative proposal that could attract attention among his fellow Republicans.
Rather than denouncing the president’s strategy, it would voice support for recommendations by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. That panel did not recommend sending more troops unless specifically requested by a military commander.
Other Democrats have plans of their own.
Senator Christopher Dodd said he wants legislation capping the number of troops in Iraq at existing levels, a plan that attracted support from Senator Edward Kennedy, who has his own bill threatening the funding of troops.
Senator Hillary Clinton, also a Democrat, yesterday announced legislation that would require Bush to obtain congressional approval for additional troops in Iraq if the Iraqis cannot show progress after six months.
Dodd and Clinton are among several Democrats with aspirations in the next presidential elections in 2008.
| Related Stories: |
|
