Watch CBS News

Iraq Study Group Strikes A Compromise

With the possible exception of former Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the members of the Iraq Study Group – a bipartisan brain trust set up to figure out what to do about Iraq – are politicians.

So it may not be too surprising to hear that the report the group has prepared and unanimously endorsed, according to sources quoted by the New York Times, is a case of carefully crafted compromise.

The sources reportedly say the recommendations, to be made public after presentation to President Bush on Dec. 6th, call for the "gradual pullback" of 15 U.S. combat brigade troops.

The report, the sources say, does not include a deadline and does not say whether the troops would go home or be redeployed to bases within Iraq or in other countries.

"I think everyone felt good about where we ended up," one source told the newspaper, describing the final report. "It is neither 'cut and run' nor 'stay the course.'"

"This afternoon, we reached a consensus... we are making recommendations," Democrat Lee Hamilton – co-chair of the Iraq Study Group, with Republican James Baker – said Wednesday, declining to reveal any details as he spoke at a Washington forum held by the Center for American Progress, a liberal group.

Several hours after bits of the report began leaking out, President Bush met in Amman, Jordan, Thursday with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, telling him that the U.S. is willing to make changes to better support the unity government in Baghdad.

President Bush also said that he and al-Maliki agreed – in a meeting that was put off Wednesday, as reports swirled in D.C. about a lack of confidence in the Iraqi leader – that Iraq should not be partitioned into separate, semi-autonomous zones.

"The prime minister made clear that splitting his country into parts, as some have suggested, is not what the Iraqi people want, and that any partition of Iraq would only lead to an increase in sectarian violence... I agree," said Mr. Bush. "He's a strong leader who wants a free and democratic Iraq to succeed."

The U.S., said President Bush, will remain in Iraq "to get the job done so long as the government wants us there."

Wednesday, as the Iraq Study Group wound up its work in Washington, it reportedly heard testimony from two former secretaries of state – George Shultz and Henry Kissinger – and from Senators on opposite sides of the debate: Democrat John Kerry, who wants a deadline for troop withdrawal, and Republican John McCain, who believes more troops should be sent to Baghdad to achieve tighter control of the Iraqi capital.

The Iraq Study Group members - five Democrats and five Republicans - had been split over the appropriate U.S. troop levels in Iraq, and whether and how to pull American forces out, one official close to the panel's deliberations told The Associated Press.

The recommendations – which are not binding upon the Bush administration – also reportedly endorse direct talks with Syria and Iran. That could, according to the Times, take the form of a regional conference on stabilizing sectarian strife-ridden Iraq and possibly issues including ongoing disputes between Israel and the Palestinians.

Robert Gates, Mr. Bush's nominee to replace Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, has previously endorsed the idea of engaging Iran and Syria.

Gates made the comments in response to a questionnaire from the Senate Armed Services Committee, which is to hold a hearing Tuesday on whether to confirm his nomination.

There are currently about 139,000 U.S. troops in Iraq; some 20,000 are in and around Baghdad, the capital.

President Bush is under growing pressure to withdraw substantial numbers of U.S. troops while shifting more responsibility to the Iraqi government. Even so, top military commanders have said they would consider increasing U.S. troop levels, at least temporarily, if they deem it to be necessary.

Mr. Bush Tuesday vowed that he will not withdraw American forces "until the mission is complete."

Iraq Study Group members reportedly avoid any direct conflict with statements of that sort by President Bush, but nonetheless moved in a somewhat different direction.

"We had to move the national debate," one study group member told the Times, speaking anonymously, "from whether to stay the course to how do we start down the path out."

The report is unlikely to win much praise at the Pentagon, according to a source at the Washington Times, who says all six members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff oppose pulling out U.S. troops now and are also against a specific withdrawal timetable.

"The chiefs are solid. They want victory," the source said. "There is no dissent."

Word of the Iraq Study Group's recommendations comes as the Pentagon considers plans to send four more battalions to Iraq early next year, including some to Baghdad.

The extra combat engineer battalions of Army reserves, would total about 3,500 troops and would come from around the United States, said officials who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The deployment, according to the Times, would not increase U.S. troop strength in Iraq – the troops would be replacing other GIs on their way home – but are viewed as controversial because the inbound soldiers would be from units which have already served in Iraq in recent years.

At a Pentagon news conference Wednesday, Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, would not say whether more troops are planned for Baghdad. He did say that was among the ideas that commanders are debating.

He also said there is no plan to shift all troops from the volatile Anbar Province into Baghdad.

Pace was asked if the advice of generals was becoming less important because of the commission's impending report and the congressional takeover by Democrats, some of whom have been critical of the war.

"This is a very complex problem, and the more 10-pound brains we can bring to bear on the problem for our nation, the better," said Pace.

View CBS News In
CBS News App Open
Chrome Safari Continue
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.