Bipartisan Push For Iraq Security Hand Off

(CBS/AP)  As pre-election pressure mounts from congressional Democrats and Republicans, a new report suggests that the White House is drafting a timetable that calls for the Iraqi government to assume more responsibility for security in the war-torn country.

The report in Sunday's New York Times said the head of the U.S.-led Multinational Forces in Iraq and the U.S. ambassador to Iraq were working on a plan that probably would — for the first time — outline milestones for disarming sectarian militias and meeting other political and economic goals.

The blueprint, to be presented to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki by the end of this year, would not threaten Iraq with a withdrawal of U.S. troops, according to the report.

The White House said the article was not accurate. Benchmarks have been part of the U.S. policy in Iraq for months, said Dan Bartlett, a top aide to President George W. Bush.

"Implicit in that is that if they are not achieving the benchmarks, we are going to have to make changes accordingly," Bartlett said, adding that troop withdrawals or other dramatic changes in U.S. policy are not being contemplated.

Republicans and Democrats urged the White House on Sunday's talk shows to step up the pressure on Iraq's prime minister to accomplish the very same goals mentioned in the Times article: calm sectarian violence and increase security.

Senators from both parties expressed wavering confidence in al-Maliki's ability to come to grips with the rising bloodshed.

They said he was the "best horse" for now to support. But they agreed that if no political solution can be found between warring Shiite and Sunni sects, peace will never be achieved.

Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, the leading Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the Bush administration must pressure the Iraqis to make political compromises on power and oil resources.

"If they don't want to do that, if they're going to have a civil war, we have to tell them, `You're going to do that without us,"' said Levin, who wants to see U.S. troops begin to leave Iraq by the end of the year.

So far, 79 U.S. soldiers have died in October, making it the deadliest month in 2006 and one of the worst since the war started.

Sen. John Warner, the committee chairman, said setting a withdrawal timetable would be disastrous because it could leave a security vacuum that terrorists would fill. But Warner, a Virginia Republican, has said a change in course may be necessary if the security situation does not improve soon.

"I think we have no other course but to give him our confidence and our support," Warner said.

But Warner also expressed concern that even al-Maliki's recent talks with sectarian leaders had not lead to a cessation of hostilities. He said al-Maliki must give more authority to the Iraqi army. "It is their job, not the U.S. coalition forces' to subdue and get rid of these private militias," he said.

Sen. Joseph Biden, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he had little confidence in either al-Maliki's ability or willingness to force a political solution to deal with militias competing for control of territory.

"Without giving the Sunnis a piece of the oil action, without following up with what they've already done under their constitution ... I don't know how he can do much of anything. I don't even think his inclination is to do much of anything," said Biden, a Democrat of Delaware.

The committee chairman, Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, said pressuring al-Maliki may not work because he does not have much clout. "We keep saying, 'Go to your Shiites and get them straightened out, or the Sunnis, or divide the oil. And al-Maliki is saying, 'There isn't any group here that wants to talk about those things,"' Lugar said.

Still Lugar said of the Iraqi prime minister, "I think he's probably the best horse to ride on in the situation."

Sen. John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat, said the president should take a harder line in dealing with Iraqi leaders: "I think you have to be more blunt. I think you have to say, no young American is going to die and give their life or limb for Iraqi politicians who refuse to compromise. They have to want democracy for themselves as much as we want it for them."

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Friday that U.S. officials were working with the Iraqi government to develop projections as to when they think they can pass off various pieces of responsibility for both security and governing.

Lugar, Warner, Biden and Levin appeared on "Fox News Sunday." Kerry was on ABC's "This Week."

[houser123]

A lot of highly regarded people have been advocating a timed withdrawal for some time now and it appears this administration is getting the message, maybe. This approach tells the Iraqi governmenet, we took out Sadaam, now it's time for you guys to step up and complete the job. We are not going to run your country and we will not stay forever. It's up to the people of Iraq to work out their differences. There was a question asked right after Sadamm fell. Did Saddam rule Iraq in the way he did because he wanted to, or did he do it becasue that is how Iraq had to be governed? At this point in time, I feel the later is the answer.

[frankly6]

Here's what Bush said about in an interview about Iraq:

"I'll stay in Iraq even if the only support I have left is from my wife and my dog."

[jopocop]

Wisdom reveals that on Nov. 7th the voters need to pull the plug on Bush and the GOP to force a real change in messed up Iraq. Frankly, Bush and the GOP had plenty of time to get it right in Iraq, the #1 issue facing us now. Simply, if the Dems fail on Nov. 7th, that ratifies and vindicates the GOP, so that they will continue more of the same in Iraq. A messed up war has to stop or change and the voters have to stand up and force this to happen.

[kwlambi]

is a private militia an insurgent, a terrorist,or a civil outcast group? this suggests that all the death and destruction is oil based. If it was then decisions could be made, so polishing the issues around oil isnt making it. We are not riding horses either. How ridiculous our politians are. The Americans went in there without much of a plan to achieve, they still have not finished what they started, so putting it on their government is not the answer either. As a viet vet I hate to see another 1975 Saigon scene, but nothing has my attention to see anything different.

[tibu987]

Vote out the incumbents, Dems and Repubs.
Vote for term limits when possible.
Let's get this country back to being a Republic for all Americans.

[frankly6]

Don%u2019t expect any type of serious policy change, redeployment of troops, ending of the Iraq war, shifting troops to Afghanistan or anything that remotely resembles common sense from this Administration%u2019s review of Iraq policies or the Baker Commission. Time and time again the American people have held out hope that this Administration will do the right thing and time and time again we have been let down. From Afghanistan, Iraq to Louisiana this administration%u2019s policies are not based on common sense or the will of the people who elected them. President Bush has been described that "He's not somebody who gets jumpy at polls." That translates to %u201CI do not care what the People who elected me think%u201D. But that is OK now too because he has exposed his true self to the American People and we are going to dethrone this administration and those who supported it starting November 7, 2006. The problem is how many more people will die because of its ineptitude before we the American People can intervene?

[frankly6]

Well said Bluestardad!

[pakaal]

I see now, no wonder everyone was so confused. Republicans have been castigating Democrats as cowards and defeatists for suggesting a timeline for withdrawal these past couple years - it's because the Republicans didn't understand what all the Democrats have been suggesting.

Thankfully the story makes it all clear now - Democrats should have been talking about "milestones" and "benchmarks", not "timetables". Note that OF COURSE Bush has had "benchmarks" for months now [...]. Gee, didn't those Democrats know that? Of course not, how would they know about benchmarks, they've been so focused on timetables they just haven't been listening!

[fallngempire]

Faced with losing their jobs congressional Republicans are clearly turning on the White House. It's a beautiful thing, as in the end all are going to go down together.

[bluestardad]

Don%u2019t expect any type of serious policy change, redeployment of troops, ending of the Iraq war, shifting troops to Afghanistan or anything that remotely resembles common sense from this Administration%u2019s review of Iraq policies or the Baker Commission. Time and time again the American people have held out hope that this Administration will do the right thing and time and time again we have been let down. From Afghanistan, Iraq to Louisiana this administration%u2019s policies are not based on common sense or the will of the people who elected them. President Bush has been described that "He's not somebody who gets jumpy at polls." That translates to %u201CI do not care what the People who elected me think%u201D. But that is OK now too because he has exposed his true self to the American People and we are going to dethrone this administration and those who supported it starting November 7, 2006. The problem is how many more people will die because of its ineptitude before we the American People can intervene?