On Tuesday and Wednesday, General David Petraeus and US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker testified before the United States' Senate about the "progress" in Iraq. While admitting that many "challenges" remain for the United States, the two largely said that the US strategy in Iraq is working. As was the case in September of 2007 with the initial report on "the Surge" West Michigan's legislators--Representative Vern Ehlers and Senators Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow--reacted to this week's testimony.
Representative Ehlers once again used Petraeus's testimony to argue that the United States should remain in Iraq and that "the Surge" has worked. Ehlers issued a statement declaring:
"I was pleased to hear from General David Patraeus about the continued progress. The troop surge has obviously worked to secure key areas of the country and help Iraqi citizens have a more peaceful day-to-day life.
"Despite these signs of progress, Iraq's security situation is still very fragile. I oppose a rapid withdrawal of troops from Iraq before we bring stability to the country.
"The good news is that progress is being made and Iraqis are increasingly playing a more fundamental role in the security of their country. I thank General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker for their work and dedication to a positive outcome in Iraq."
As has been typical with Ehlers' claims regarding the Iraq War, he offers no proof to support his claims.
Unfortunately, while Ehlers support for Petraeus's testimony and the continued occupation of Iraq comes as no surprise, Democratic Party Senator Levin's comments should also be rejected by those against the Iraq War. While Levin has consistently voted to fund the occupation of Iraq, much of the antiwar movement--at least here in West Michigan--has continued to support him and sees him as a critic of the war and an ally to the movement. Levin has offered praise for "the Surge" in the past and in introductory remarks to General Petraeus' testimony, Senator Levin's criticism of the war focused primarily on how he believes the Iraqis are not worthy of a continued US presence. As is usual for Levin's comments, he entirely ignores the devastating impact that the Iraq War has had on Iraqis. While Levin did call for "a reasonable timetable for a change of mission and redeployment of most of our troops," it was done so in a manner that was insulting to Iraqis.
Overall, Levin's comments are fairly typical of the Democratic Party's reaction to "the Surge." Rather than evaluating "the successes" of "the Surge"--in terms of the human cost of the war and the impacts on Iraqis--Democrats have largely accepted the idea that the policy has worked in a limited sense (by reducing violence) and have refused to debate it seriously. During the Congressional hearings, Democrats seemed to treat the hearings as theater and largely avoided substantive discussion of what is happening on the ground. Had the Democrats wished to do so, they could have raised serious challenges regarding the "drop in violence" (some have suggested that violence has dropped because ethnic cleansing is almost complete), the tenuous nature of various cease-fire agreements in Iraq, and the desires of the Iraqi people and government. In response to the announcement that troop levels would drop to pre-Surge levels but that there would be no further withdrawal, Iraq's Prime Minister said that US troops should be removed from Iraq. Democrats also largely avoided an opportunity to criticize the Bush administration's claims that Iran is engaged in a "proxy war" in Iraq.
