Jan 11, 2007- Congresswoman Kaptur Responds to Bush's Iraq Announcement

I do not support an escalation of UStroop levels in Iraq.President Bush cannot lead Americato military victory in Iraqabsent a viable political solution that puts Iraq back together and redeploysour soldiers from that of an occupying force. His statement is three years toolate and several hundred thousand soldiers short. The President refuses to seethat his strategy to combat terrorism has created an Islamic Shia state, withthe relegation of the Sunni and the escape of Christians. Is this lopsidedresult really in the interests of regional peace long term? Why should our US forces the President says he wants to deployto Baghdad andAnbar province be used to do the clean up work for the Shia-led government? Thegrowing insurgency inside Iraqand anti-American sentiment both inside and outside Iraq will not be quelled by sendingmore troops. It will ripen it.

There is now only one choice: Iraqis must take responsibility for their ownsecurity as part of a political solution that works. But how can that politicalsolution work when minorities in Iraq feel so underrepresented? Thisis why the international community, and Iraq's neighbors, must becomeengaged in diplomatic efforts.

President Bush cannot lead Americato victory in Iraq absent aviable political solution that puts Iraq back together and removes oursoldiers as an occupying force. The President refuses to acknowledge that hisstrategy to combat terrorism has created a growing insurgency and anti-Americansentiment, both inside Iraqand outside it. Sending more troops at this time merely to follow the samefailed policy is three years late and several hundred thousand soldiers short.There is now only one choice: Iraqis must take responsibility for their ownsecurity as part of a political solution that works.

Throughout the Muslim and Persian world, the President's policies haveemboldened anti-American leaders in Lebanon,Iran, Syria, Bahrain,the Palestinian Authority, Saudi Arabia,Egypt, Pakistan, and,now, the Horn of Africa. The Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive war, test marketed inIraq,succeeded in deposing Saddam Hussein and determining whether or not hepossessed weapons of mass destruction. It is time, therefore, for the presidentto declare victory and transform the operation.

As decorated CIA intelligence officer Robert Baer has written: "We arewar in America and throughout the Western world, at war with an enemy with noinfrastructure to attack, with no planes to shoot out of the sky, with no boatsto sink to the bottom of the seas, and precious few tanks to blow up for theamusement of the viewers of CNN."

Baer contends the only way to defeat such a faceless enemy is by substantialincreases in human intelligence. But that intelligence has been lacking. Evenin the US Embassy in Baghdad,almost no one speaks Arabic. Dr. Edward Luttwak, a strategic affairs expert atthe Center for Strategic and International Studies, reinforced that view thisweek by noting that the US general who led the operation to apprehend Osama binLaden neither spoke Arabic, nor showed any interest in learning it, anddepended on translations of intercepts to detect him.

It is too late to fill that intelligence gap so fundamental to militarysuccess.

Now, with the president's proposal to accelerate deployment of certainunits, those units are going to deploy with too few personnel or withsignificant numbers of new personnel. This decreases unit cohesiveness andindividual proficiency. Many units are facing three or more deployments-farbeyond what was originally anticipated.

We also know previous troop escalations have yielded no more success thanprevious escalations did in Vietnam.

Last summer's escalation in troops levels has not tamped down an increasinginsurgency. Indeed, all prior troop escalations have yielded increasingviolence. From December 2003-April 2004, as part of a massive rotation of250,000 troops, troop levels in Iraqwere raised from 122,000 to 137,000. The increase did nothing to preventMuqtada al-Sadr's Najaf uprising. April 2004 was the second deadliest month forAmerican forces. Then, from November 2004 through March 2005, as part of aneffort to improve counterinsurgency operations after the Fallujah offensive inNovember 2004-and to increase security levels before the January 2005 constitutionalelections in Iraq-- U.S. forces were increased by 12,000 more troops to150,000. There was no long-term positive impact on security.

Then, in the fall of 2005, the Bush Administration increased troop levels by22,000, making a total of 160,000 American troops in Iraq around the constitutionalreferendum and parliamentary elections. While the elections were not marred bymajor violence, there was little long-term impact on quelling rising sectarianviolence and attacks on American troops.

Finally, in June 2006, the Bush Administration announced a new plan forsecuring Baghdadby increasing the presence of Iraqi security forces. That plan failed. So, inJuly the White House announced that additional American troops would be sentinto Baghdad.By October, the U.S.military spokesman, General William Caldwell, acknowledged that the operationand troop increase had been a failure and "had not met our overallexpectations of sustaining a reduction in the levels of violence."

The president cannot hold the ground by employing greater and greaternumbers of unaccountable contracted forces and mercenaries to compensate forthe lack of security and rising anti-Americanism. Our military's time-honoredvalues of duty, honor, and country are being eviscerated by an operation thatis depending more and more on hired guns to police the streets, onbounty-seeking contractors to guard important sites, and foreign nationals tocarry out internal security operations in Iraq.

Some Iraqis have proposed dividing Baghdadinto nine sectors and policing them with Iraqi troops, as American soldiers areredeployed as backups. That might work. But the U.S.needs a new political strategy that addresses the rising levels of globalterrorism the Bush policy is yielding, and the growing anti-American sentimentthat is brewing in Iraqand the Muslim world and beyond. That strategy also demands significant newhuman intelligence networks, not standing armies. Moreover, we needinternational diplomacy to engage all nations that border Iraq to seek aresolution to the strife. And we need a foreign policy that does not put theinterests of oil above the value of human life.