Democratic Iraq Amendment to Put More Stress on Troops

If Congress is in session, then Congressional Democrats must be working on a way to end the Iraq war. This week the stage is the Senate, which is taking up the defense authorization bill. The first amendments to be considered are likely to deal with the U.S. base at Guantanamo Bay — one amendment to grant detainees the right to contest their detention in federal court, the second to close the prison. And, at some point in the next few days, the Senate is likely to pass an amendment offered by Senator Webb to mandate time at home between deployments to Iraq.

Also likely to arise during the Iraq debate is a proposal by Jim Webb, D-Va., that would require that troops be given at least as much time at home as they spend abroad. The measure would effectively limit the number of troops in Iraq.

CQ is mistaken in this assessment, according to Secretary Gates–as are many other media outlets. Gates says that the amendment could in theory limit the number of troops in Iraq. But because the senior military leadership is unanimous on the strategy represented by Operation Phantom Thunder, the Webb amendment will instead place additional stresses on servicemen and women in Iraq, as well as force the Pentagon to call up more members of the National Guard and Reserve:

We would have to look at extending already deployed units beyond their scheduled rotation. We would have to accept gaps in capability as units that rotate home aren’t replaced right away for periods perhaps of weeks. This would also put at risk our ability to overlap units that are rotating in with units that are rotating out in a way that helps improve their effectiveness, a smooth handoff and also, frankly, minimizing casualties. We would have to look at increasing the in-lieu-of — the use of in-lieu-of units that are either minimally or not normally trained for a particular mission — for example, putting organizations and units that are artillery in military police roles or something like that. We think this would degrade combat readiness. We would have probably have to consider returning to cobbling together new units from other disparate units or unassigned individuals and personnel. We also think this would result in less effective units being deployed and would reverse the decision made — that I made earlier this year to manage rotations on a unit basis. And finally, we would have to look at significantly increasing the deployment of the National Guard and Reserve units due to tighter constraints placed on the active force.

In the face of this straightforward and candid assessment of how the Pentagon would handle the Webb amendment, it will be interesting to watch Senate Democrats try to sell this as a measure to support the troops. It is expected that Webb’s amendment will achieve the 60-vote supermajority now needed to pass most controversial proposals, which could ultimately lead the president to veto the bill. Of more significance will be whatever amendment Senator Levin and the Democratic leadership produces in cooperation with moderate Republicans. That amendment is likely to mandate the commencement of a troop drawdown (which the president has of course, already called for). It may or may not specify a date-certain for withdrawal — depending on how many Republicans indicate support for each approach:

…Their amendment would require the administration to begin the drawdown of an unspecified number of U.S. forces in 120 days and shift the mission of those remaining from population protection to training Iraqi troops, targeting terrorists, protecting U.S. assets and guarding Iraq’s borders. The measure would set a date for completing the withdrawal of most troops, but Reid and the measure’s authors have not yet decided whether that date would be a binding requirement or a non-binding goal. Making it a goal could net more Republican votes. “They have not made a final decision as to how to proceed” on that question, said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Reid.

There’s no expectation that Congress can force a troop withdrawal over the president’s veto. The votes are not there. So in a sense, all of this is shadow theater. In the meantime, Congress continues to fall behind on appropriations bills, reauthorization of the FAA and FDA, health care reform, energy reform, and other important issues where progress is possible.

Related Content