Opposition is loyal - from either side of the aisle

Opposing the Bush administration's Middle East foreign policy has required a special kind of loyalty to our country by a few Republicans in Congress. We expect loyal opposition from Senate Democrats, but it is a very welcome surprise to hear reasoned Republican opposition.

Splits with the administration - We are encountering more such subtle opposition as the year progresses. For example, some critical questions came from some Republican committee members at today's hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, chaired by Senator John Warner, R-Virginia.

The subject of the hearing was "Afghanistan, Iraq and Counterterrorism Operations." The Defense Department's "big guns" came to testify. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld used the phrase "The Face of the 21st Century" to describe Hezbollah and the conflict in the Middle East. He and Generals Peter Pace and John Abizaid were questioned by a wide variety of Senators from both sides of the political aisle. Democrats' questions were much more critical, as could be expected.

Generals pulled no punches - Reporter Anne Plummer Flaherty of the AP, opened with this headline: "Generals Raise Fears of Iraq Civil War." I quote from the story,

Two of the Pentagon's most senior generals conceded to Congress on Thursday that the surge in sectarian violence in Baghdad in recent weeks means Iraq may descend into civil war.
"Iraq could move toward civil war" if the violence is not contained, Gen. John Abizaid, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, told the Senate Armed Services Committee. "I believe that the sectarian violence is probably as bad as I have seen it," he said, adding that the top priority in Iraq is to secure the capital, where factional violence has surged in recent weeks despite efforts by the new Iraqi government to stop the fighting.
Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the panel, "We do have the possibility of that devolving into civil war." He added that this need not happen and stressed that ultimately it depends on the Iraqis more than on the U.S. military.
"Shiite and Sunni are going to have to love their children more than they hate each other," Pace said, before the tensions can be overcome. "The weight of that must be on the Iraqi people and the Iraqi government."

Senate Committee Republican highlights:

• Committee Chair Warner asked the generals to define what the mission would be if Iraq slid into civil war, and questioned whether the current Authorization for the Use of Force would still be enough. The NYT has that story, from which I quote:

  But the committee chairman, Senator John W. Warner, Republican of Virginia, signaled that political support for the conflict could be fraying. “I think we have to examine very carefully what Congress authorized the president to do in the context of a situation if we’re faced with all-out civil war and whether we have to come back to the Congress to get further indication of support,” Mr. Warner said.

• Senator John McCain, R-Arizona, characterized the fight against the Iraqi insurgency as "Whack-a-mole,"and asked whether anyone had anticipated this trend a year ago. He was referring to the military practice of moving forces from hot spot to hot spot around Iraq during the past year. Quoting from the Washington Post,

  Abizaid came under some tough questioning from Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) about the U.S. plan to move troops into Baghdad from elsewhere in Iraq, a move the senator suggested would leave other potential hot spots more vulnerable. McCain pressed the general on whether the insurgent stronghold of Ramadi in western Iraq is "under control," and Abizaid declined to affirm that it was, saying instead that "the situation in Ramadi is better than it was two months ago." He said about 3,500 troops from Mosul, plus military police, would be moving to Baghdad to help reduce the violence there.
  Said McCain, "What I worry about is we're playing a game of whack-a-mole here," with insurgent activity popping up in places that troops have vacated. "Now we're going to have to move troops into Baghdad from someplace else. It's very disturbing."

• Senator Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, held a tutorial he titled, "Insurgency 101," closing it with the rhetorical question, "Why can't a country of 25 million people contain an insurgency of 30 to 40 thousand people?" He stated that the country is not united and asked, what else is going on there?

• Senator Susan Collins, R-Maine, asked whether our exit strategy (based upon the Iraqi army's capacity to take over their own defense) is a valid one. She went on to say that we need a political solution. In addition Senator Collins discussed the widespread corruption involved in the reconstruction of Iraq. Collins chairs the Homeland Security Committee, which held hearings on the matter yesterday.

How much more I would prefer to be celebrating success in helping the good people of Iraq towards democracy. Though I opposed going into this war from the beginning, it was our preemptive invasion that began the process that is now going so badly. And now it would be absolute folly for the U.S. military to try to stay in the middle of a full blown civil war.
Our own country matters, too. And loyal opposition from thoughtful Republicans to the current administration's stubbornness is very welcomed.

Tags: Iraq war foreign policy Republican Senate Defense Department military politics
My "creative post" today at Southwest Blogger is about lighting candles for peace.