WASHINGTON - United States President Barack Obama has given military commanders
a free hand to determine the size and composition of a residual force in Iraq
up to 50,000 troops, apparently including the option of leaving one or more
combat brigades or bringing them from the United States, after the August 2010
deadline for the ostensible withdrawal of all combat brigades now in Iraq.
Although the ostensible purpose of the combat brigades remaining in Iraq would
be to protect other US troops in the country, they would also provide the kind
of combat capability that US commanders have wanted to maintain to deal with a
broad range of contingencies.
The fact that the commanders have the option to nullify Obama's
pledge to removal all combat brigades raises serious questions about whether he
has given up control over his Iraq policy.
Obama declared, in a speech at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, that by August 31,
2010, "[O]ur combat mission in Iraq will end." But he confirmed earlier
indications from administration officials that the residual force would be from
35,000 to 50,000 troops - far higher than Democratic congressional leaders had
previously been led to expect by Obama.
Obama did not refer to the possibility that combat brigades would remain in the
country after August 31, 2010, but Defense Secretary Robert Gates admitted as
much in a question and answer session with reporters after the speech.
Obama also stated, "I intend to remove all US troops from Iraq by the end of
2011." But Gates, and the top commander in Iraq, General Ray Odierno, have both
indicated on the record that they want to keep US troops in Iraq even after
that date, based on the assumption that the Iraqi government will renegotiate
the Status of Forces Agreement.
NBC News' Pentagon correspondent Jim Miklaszewski reported just before Obama's
speech that discussions had taken place in the Kirkuk area between some US
military commanders and Iraqis "to establish what could end up as a permanent
air base, US air base, in Kirkuk".
Obama's claim that the US combat mission will end in August 2010 raises the
question whether he will call a halt to combat patrols by US personnel embedded
with Iraqi units. The sweeping concession made to Central Command chief General
David Petraeus and Iraq commander Odierno on the residual force suggests that
he will not demand the end of such operations by US troops.
The freedom granted to Odierno and Petraeus on the residual force overshadows
his concession to the generals and Gates in accepting the recommendation for a
19-month timetable for withdrawing combat brigades.
Obama had appeared to be leaning toward the 16-month withdrawal of combat
brigades he had pledged during the campaign as recently as a January 21 White
House meeting with Gates and Petraeus.
Obama provided no further details on the residual force. According to a
Washington Post report published on Friday, two unnamed "senior officials" -
one of whom was presumably Gates - told Congressional leaders on Thursday that
Obama would let commanders decide not only the exact schedule of withdrawal of
combat brigades but also the size of the residual force.
In a teleconference with reporters on Friday afternoon, Gates appeared to
confirm indirectly that he and field commanders had discussed either keeping
combat brigades in Iraq but calling them "non-combat" forces or actually
sending new combat brigades to Iraq from the US during the draw-down of the
brigades now in Iraq.
A reporter asked Gates, "You have said they're not going to be combat brigades,
but are you going to take combat brigades that are in the United States and
sort of rename them, redesignate them, or are you going to create new units for
this specific mission?"
Gates first sidestepped the question entirely. "[W]ith respect to the 35,000 to
50,000," he said, "I think that that's a question probably better directed at
General Odierno." But he then added, "[I]n terms of whether those are new units
or whether they are re-missioned units that are already there, I think remains
to be seen."
CBS News' Pentagon correspondent David Martin, reflecting the leaks from
Pentagon officials, reported on February 24 that the residual force would be
organized in "training and assistance brigades" that would be capable of
conducting combat operations and calling air strikes from carrier or land-based
aircraft. In a comment to CBS News' Political Hotsheet, Martin said the
units would be "fully combat capable", suggesting that they would be drawn from
combat brigades.
Some leading Senate and House Democrats were clearly taken by surprise by the
size of the residual force to which Obama had agreed. On the Rachel Maddow Show
on Thursday, House speaker Nancy Pelosi said, "I don't know what the
justification is for 50,000, a presence of 50,000 troops in Iraq."
Senate majority leader Harry Reid and Senator Carl Levin, chair of the Armed
Services Committee, both indicated that the figure was higher than they had
expected. Senator Patty Murray of Washington, said, "I do think we have to look
carefully at the numbers that are there and do it as quickly as we can."
Defeated Republican presidential candidate John McCain, on the other hand,
sounded like a loyal supporter of Obama's decision, saying it is "reasonable"
and that he is "cautiously optimistic that the plan that is laid out by the
president can lead to success".
Obama even took a step toward committing himself to reversing the whole
withdrawal policy if violence in Iraq resumed any time before the end of 2011.
Representative John McHugh, the ranking Republican on the House Armed Services
Committee, said Obama had assured him that he would "revisit" the withdrawal
plan "if the situation on the ground deteriorates and violence increases".
The decision on Iraq policy announced by Obama on Friday ended a four-month
period of maneuvering by Gates, Odierno and Petraeus aimed at getting Obama to
change his Iraq policy.
Gates and the two generals had wanted to keep a large residual force, including
combat brigades, in Iraq not only through 2011 but for at least another four
years beyond that. They had presented a 23-month draw-down plan to Obama at a
January 21 White House meeting as an alternative to his 16-month draw-down
plan.
Later, they settled on 19 months as an acceptable compromise. It is now clear,
however, that the primary objective of the trio was to get Obama to approve
complete control by the commanders over the residual force up to 50,000.
The Washington Post reported that the senior administration officials who
briefed Congressional leaders on Thursday said that Obama's "senior civilian
and military advisers" - meaning Gates and Joint Chiefs chairman Admiral Mike
Mullen - had recommended both the 19-month draw-down plan and the size of the
residual force.
The Post reported the "senior officials" as suggesting that the reason for both
recommendations was to avoid "jeopardizing Iraq's still-fragile security".
However, a source who was close to Obama during the campaign and maintains ties
to his advisers said Obama's acceptance of the 19-month plan was to "defuse the
conflict with the Pentagon".
Not mentioned in either Obama's speech or briefings by Gates is the question of
whether US pilots and planes will be part of the residual force after August
2010. The silence on that matter suggests that US airpower will continue to
participate in combat, despite the supposed end of the US combat mission.
Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist specializing
in US national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book,
Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam, was
published in 2006.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
