PATIENCE ON IRAQ POLICIES URGED . BUSH AIDES DEFEND TROOP AND AID LEVELS

  Informe de Dana Milbank en “The Washington Post” del 27.08.2003
 

CRAWFORD, Tex., Aug. 25 -- President Bush's advisers launched a campaign today to build public patience for the administration's Iraq policies, responding to mounting criticism by arguing that there is no need for more troops to counter swelling violence in the U.S.-occupied country.

Kicking off a coordinated effort to defend Bush's handling of the Iraq occupation, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice broadly rebutted complaints from those on the political right and left who say the administration has not committed sufficient troops and money to convert Iraq to peace and democracy. Bush, vacationing on his ranch here while his aides spoke at the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in nearby San Antonio, is likely to expand on the defense in a speech on Iraq in St. Louis on Tuesday.

"We must remain patient," Rice said in her address to the veterans. "When Americans begin a noble cause, we finish it. We are 117 days from the end of major combat operations in Iraq. That is not very long." In front of the same group, Rumsfeld said "it would be a mistake" to conclude that more troops are needed in Iraq.

Criticism of Bush's commitment to Iraq has been intensifying from Democrats and Republican foreign policy hawks following a wave of violence in Iraq and throughout the region. At the same time, public uneasiness over the occupation has increased.

The twin speeches to the 104th VFW national convention came one year after Vice President Cheney spoke at the 103rd VFW convention in what became the beginning of the administration's efforts to confront and disarm Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. It was then that Cheney said, amid growing doubts about the wisdom of war against Iraq: "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."

The diplomatic and political effort that followed Cheney's speech led to the war in Iraq this spring. But now the administration faces a different Iraq problem: Instead of finding illegal weapons in Iraq and spreading peace through the Middle East, it has found a stubborn guerrilla war in Iraq and increasing instability in the Middle East. Last week's bombing of the U.N. headquarters in Baghdad, which killed the U.N. envoy to Iraq and 22 others, came on the same day a bus bombing in Jerusalem spurred an unraveling of peace efforts between Israelis and Palestinians.

Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), a presidential candidate who also appeared at the VFW convention today, put the blame for the troubles in the region on Bush for "stubbornly" refusing to allow other nations to cooperate in the administration of Iraq.

"What we urgently need now to protect our young men and women in uniform -- and America's role in the world -- are decisions based on professional military judgments and strategic vision, not politics and pride," he told the veterans.

The complaints from Democrats have been matched by similar criticism from conservatives who supported Bush's handling of the war. A day after Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) called for at least another division of U.S. troops in Iraq -- that would add 20,000 to the approximately 136,000 there -- two influential conservatives accused the administration today of a "baffling" failure "to commit resources to the rebuilding of Iraq."

"While it is indeed possible that, with a little luck, the United States can muddle through to success in Iraq over the coming months, the danger is that the resources the administration is devoting to Iraq right now are insufficient, and the speed with which they are being deployed is insufficiently urgent," Robert Kagan and William Kristol wrote in the new issue of the Weekly Standard. "These failings, if not corrected soon, could over time lead to disaster."

They concluded that "it is painfully obvious that there are too few American troops operating in Iraq." They said it is the same with financial resources and wrote of "the astonishing lack of American civilians" in Iraq.

Rice, in her remarks, described a vastly different Iraq. Outlining improvements in services to the Iraqis, she counseled patience as the United States embarks on a broad rehabilitation of Iraq and the entire Middle East, an effort she called the "moral mission of our time." She did not directly answer the call for more resources in Iraq, instead making the case to remain in the region. "Transformation in the Middle East will require a commitment of many years," she said. "The transformation of the Middle East is the only guarantee that it will no longer produce ideologies of hatred that lead men to fly airplanes into buildings in New York or Washington."

Rice remained optimistic about the broader Middle East. "Despite the horrific events of recent days, we have seen real progress toward peace for Israelis and Palestinians," she said.

Rumsfeld, too, outlined progress in Iraq. "The 100-plus days that have passed since Iraq's liberation have been days of both difficulty, to be sure, but also progress," he said in a session with troops at nearby Lackland Air Force Base after his VFW speech. "And the outcome is not in doubt."

Rumsfeld did not rule out future increases in troop strength. "We will put whatever number of U.S. forces in that country as the combatant commander and the Joint Chiefs of Staff decide is appropriate at any given time," he told reporters. He said Gen. John Abizaid, the head of U.S. Central Command, believes the number of U.S. forces "is appropriate at the present time." He said if Abizaid wanted more troops, "it would happen in a minute."

The defense secretary said Abizaid wants to increase forces from other countries, and Rumsfeld said that is happening. "We do need international support and assistance," he told the soldiers, but made clear that the United States would not relinquish control of the operation to the United Nations. "What is the likelihood of our forces serving under a blue-hatted United Nations leadership? I think that's not going to happen."