The confidential assessment by the commander, Lt. Gen.
Raymond T. Odierno, reflects the military¹s new
counterinsurgency doctrine, which puts a premium on
sustained efforts to try to win over a wary population.
What a joke! More easily could the wolf gain the confidence the sheep.
rkm
--------------------------------------------------------
Original source URL:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/08/washington/08military.html
March 8, 2007
Buildup in Iraq Needed Into ¹08, U.S. General Says
By DAVID S. CLOUD and MICHAEL R. GORDON
WASHINGTON, March 7 ‹ The day-to-day commander of American forces in Iraq has
recommended that the heightened American troop levels there be maintained
through February 2008, military officials said Wednesday.
The White House has never said exactly how long it intends the troop buildup to
last, but military officials say the increased American force level will begin
declining in August unless additional units are sent or more units are held
over.
The confidential assessment by the commander, Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno,
reflects the military¹s new counterinsurgency doctrine, which puts a premium on
sustained efforts to try to win over a wary population. It also stems from the
complex logistics of deploying the five additional combat brigades that are
being sent to Iraq as part of what the White House calls a ³surge² of forces.
In fact, for now, it is really more of a trickle, since only two of the five
brigades are in Iraq. The American military is stretched so thin that the last
of the brigades is not expected to begin operations until June.
In both the House and the Senate, most Democrats and many Republicans have made
clear their opposition even to the current troop increase, and a decision by the
White House to extend its duration would probably intensify the political debate
over the war.
Democratic lawmakers most strenuously opposed to the war are likely to point to
the increased stress on the armed forces in trying to persuade party leaders to
back a plan that would cut off financing for any troop increase, a course that
the Democratic leadership has so far declined to embrace. In its effort to blunt
the Congressional opposition to the new strategy, the Bush administration has
cited what it calls early signs of progress, including a reduction in sectarian
killings in Baghdad. But military officials say it is far too soon to draw any
firm conclusions.
President Bush has often said that he will listen closely to advice from
commanders in the field in making decisions about strategy and manpower in Iraq,
but Pentagon officials emphasized Wednesday that no decision to extend the
³surge² had been made. Military officials said General Odierno had provided his
assessment to his superior, Gen. David H. Petraeus, who took over as the top
American commander in Iraq this year. General Petraeus has yet to make a formal
recommendation to the Pentagon.
But the question of how long the buildup should last has already become the
focus of major concern for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Defense Secretary
Robert M. Gates.
³We¹re looking, as we should, at each of the three possibilities: hold what you
have, come down, or plus up if you need to,² Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters at the Pentagon. General Pace said that
³early data points² showed that sectarian attacks were slightly down since the
Baghdad operation began. But he said that the increase in car bombs suggested
that Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia was trying to incite further hostilities with this
method.
When the Bush administration announced its troop buildup in January, it said it
was sending 21,500 troops to Baghdad and Anbar Province. Since then, the
Pentagon has said that as many as 7,000 additional support troops would also be
deployed, including some 2,200 additional military police that General Petraeus
had asked for to handle an anticipated increase in detainees. These increases
would bring the total number of American troops in Iraq to around 160,000.
Any extension of the troop buildup would add to the strain on Army and Marine
forces that have already endured years of continuous deployments. According to
the current schedule, a Minnesota National Guard brigade whose Iraq deployment
was extended as part of the troop reinforcement is to leave in August. A senior
Pentagon official said that the number of forces would be down to ³presurge²
levels in December unless additional units were sent or kept longer.
Decisions need to be made soon, Army officials say, to identify potential
replacement units or extensions. To meet troop requirements, the Army would need
to look seriously at mobilizing additional National Guard units later this year.
Another point of stress is the amount of time active duty units have spent in
the United States between deployments. It takes around a year at home to prepare
a combat brigade for Iraq. The Army generally has been able to avoid sending
units back to Iraq or Afghanistan without at least a year at home.
But if Mr. Bush decides to extend the buildup, the first of the Army brigades to
return to Iraq with less than a year at home are likely to do so later this
year.
³As you move to less than a year, you¹re beginning to erode the ability of the
service chiefs to produce a ready force,² said a senior Pentagon official, who
emphasized that the United States needed to be prepared to deal with a range of
threats.
Despite the strains, some military officials in Iraq say it is unrealistic to
expect a troop buildup of several months to create enough of a breathing space
for Iraqis to achieve political reconciliation. ³There is Washington time and
Baghdad time,² said a senior Defense official in Iraq. ³Some in Washington want
it now, and there is reality on the ground in Baghdad. They don¹t always match.²
One concern is that Shiite militants and some insurgents will try to outlast the
American troops if the buildup is too short. A longer buildup would give the
American and Iraqi forces more time to disperse economic assistance, provide
better protection to Iraqi neighborhoods and try to win over the Iraqi public.
³You have to protect the people long enough to get economic assistance to them
and change their attitude and change their behavior,² said Jack Keane, the
retired vice chief of staff of the Army, who has argued that the troop buildup
should last 12 to 18 months. ³You cannot do that in weeks. It takes months to do
that. The problem with the short-term surge is that the enemy can wait you out.²
The recent National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq also suggested that the Iraqi
Security Forces would not be able to assume the major responsibility for
securing Baghdad in the near future. An unclassified version of the report noted
that ³the Iraqi Security Forces, particularly the Iraqi police, will be hard
pressed in the next 12 to 18 months to execute significantly increased security
responsibilities, and particularly to operate independently against Shia
militias with success.²
Given the time needed to adjust training schedules and prepare units, decisions
may need to be made before there is clear evidence about whether the new
strategy is working. ³If he defers some decisions he potentially will foreclose
deployment options downstream because people won¹t begin to move,² said a
Pentagon official, referring to Secretary Gates. ³By deferring a decision he
will in effect be making a decision.²
The additional American troops in the troop reinforcement plan are intended to
support a new strategy in which American forces are taking up positions in
Baghdad neighborhoods and not limiting themselves to conducting patrols from
large bases. Iraqi security forces in Baghdad are also being expanded, including
by the addition of Iraqi Army units largely made up of Kurds.
The strategy calls for the establishment of 10 districts in Baghdad. At least
one American battalion is to be paired with Iraqi units in each district. The
hope is that this plan will afford more protection to the Iraqi public and,
along with political and economic moves by the government, head off further
bloodletting.
Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company
--
--------------------------------------------------------
Escaping the Matrix website http://escapingthematrix.org/
cyberjournal website http://cyberjournal.org
Community Democracy Framework: http://cyberjournal.org/DemocracyFramework.html
subscribe cyberjournal list mailto:•••@••.•••
Posting archives http://cyberjournal.org/show_archives/
