WASHINGTON, Sept 29: The top US commander in Iraq disclosed on Thursday that only a single Iraqi battalion is capable of independent operations and acknowledged conditions may worsen there even if a constitution is approved.
Senators sharply questioned administration claims of progress in Iraq, zeroing in on General George Casey’s revelation before the Senate Armed Services Committee that only one Iraqi battalion was capable of operating fully independently.
The last time Gen Casey reported to Congress several months ago, he said three battalions were at Level One, a rating for units that are capable of independent operations.
“We fully recognize that Iraqi armed forces will not have an independent capability for some time, because they don’t have an institutional base to support them,” he said. “And so Level One is one battalion.”
“It was three. Now it’s gone from three to one?” interjected Senator John McCain, a Republican from Arizona.
“Things change in a battalion. We’re making assessments on leadership, on training. There are a lot of variables that are involved here, senator,” Gen Casey said.
Washington’s plans to reduce forces in Iraq next year have depended heavily on turning responsibility for security to Iraqi forces, as well as on a constitutional referendum and elections to undercut support for the resistance.
Gen Casey predicted that the constitution would likely be approved in the Oct 15 vote even if, as expected, Sunnis vote against it by a large majority.
Sunnis need a two-thirds majority in three provinces to block the constitution, which provides for national elections on Dec 15.
But when asked whether the situation could worsen in Iraq even if the constitution is approved but with a large Sunni ‘no’ vote, Gen Casey said: “I think that’s entirely possible.”
“As we’ve looked at this, we’ve looked for the constitution to be a national compact. The perception now is that it’s not,” he said.
Senator Carl Levin told US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who testified along with Gen Casey and other top military leaders, that the Iraqis needed to told forcefully that it is not enough to pass the constitution if a significant faction opposed it.
“Can that message be delivered to the Iraqis so that they don’t think they have us there for some unlimited period, and it doesn’t make any difference that they work out their political differences?” the committee’s ranking Democrat said.
Turning to Gen Casey, Donald Rumsfeld asked the general whether that message has been communicated in his and US Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad’s meetings with Iraqi leaders.
“I would not say necessarily as forceful as Senator Levin just put it,” the general said.
Gen Casey said the US military is putting Iraqi forces increasingly in the lead of operations as a part of a strategy aimed at reducing the US military presence.
“I do believe that the possibility for condition-based reductions of coalition forces still exists for 2006,” he said.
Senator McCain, however, said the reliance on Iraqi security forces was ‘a big gamble’. He argued that more US troops, not fewer, were needed to pacify Iraq and close its open border with Syria to guerillas.
Gen Richard Myers, the outgoing chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in a rare show of emotion defended the decision to rely on a smaller US force in Iraq as ‘not a cut-and-run strategy’.
“This is a win strategy. And it’s trying to walk that very fine line between being seen as an occupier and being effective and winning this war and helping the Iraqis stand up on their feet and take the fight to the enemy,” he said.
In a scathing reply, Senator McCain said: “Gen Myers seems to assume that everything has gone fine, and our declarations of victory, of which there have been many, have not had an impact on American public opinion.
“Things have not gone as we had planned or expected, nor as we were told by you, Gen Myers. And that’s why I’m very worried, because I think we have to win this conflict,” he said.—AFP