Senate Dems Move to Limit Iraq Mission
Senate Dems Move to Limit Iraq Mission
Friday February 23, 2007 2:46 AM
AP Photo NYOL913
By DAVID ESPO
AP Special Correspondent
WASHINGTON (AP) - Determined to challenge President Bush, Senate Democrats
are drafting legislation to limit the mission of U.S. troops in Iraq,
effectively revoking the broad authority Congress granted in 2002, officials said
Thursday.
While these officials said the precise wording of the measure remains
unsettled, one draft would restrict American troops in Iraq to combating al-Qaida,
training Iraqi army and police forces, maintaining Iraq’s territorial
integrity and otherwise proceeding with the withdrawal of combat forces.
The officials, Democratic aides and others familiar with private
discussions, spoke only on condition of anonymity, saying rank-and-file senators had not
yet been briefed on the effort. They added, though, the Senate Majority
Leader Harry Reid is expected to present the proposal to fellow Democrats early
next week for their consideration.
The plan is to attempt to add the measure to anti-terrorism legislation that
scheduled to be on the Senate floor next week and the week following.
Jim Manley, a spokesman for Reid, declined to discuss the deliberations,
saying only, “No final decisions have been made on how to proceed.'’
Any attempt to limit Bush’s powers as commander in chief would likely face
strong opposition from Republican allies of the administration in the Senate
and could also face a veto threat.
The decision to try to limit the military mission marks the next move in
what Reid and other Senate war critics have said will be a multistep effort to
force a change in Bush’s strategy and eventually force an end to U.S.
participation in the nearly four-year-old war.
Earlier efforts to pass a nonbinding measure critical of Bush’s decision to
deploy 21,500 additional troops ended in gridlock after Senate Republicans
blocked votes on two separate measures.
The emerging Senate plan differs markedly from an approach favored by
critics of the war in the House, where a nonbinding measure passed last week.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she expects the next challenge to Bush’s war
policies to come in the form of legislation requiring the Pentagon to adhere to
strict training and readiness standards in the case of troops ticketed for
the war zone.
Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., the leading advocate of that approach, has said it
would effectively deny Bush the ability to proceed with the troop buildup that
has been partially implemented since he announced it in January.
Some Senate Democrats have been privately critical of that approach, saying
it would have virtually no chance of passing and could easily backfire
politically in the face of Republican arguments that it would deny reinforcements
to troops already in the war zone.
Several Senate Democrats have called in recent days for revoking the
original authorization that Bush sought and won from Congress in the months before
the U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein.
That measure authorized the president to use the armed forces “as he
determines to be necessary and appropriate … to defend the national security of
the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq'’ and to enforce
relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions.
At the time the world body had passed resolutions regarding Iraq’s presumed
effort to develop weapons of mass destruction.
In a speech last week, Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware, chairman of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee, said, “I am working on legislation to repeal
that authorization and replace it with a much narrower mission statement for
our troops in Iraq.'’
He added that Congress should make clear what the mission of U.S. troops is:
to responsibly draw down, while continuing to combat terrorists, train
Iraqis and respond to emergencies.
“We should make equally clear what their mission is not: to stay in Iraq
indefinitely and get mired in a savage civil war,'’ said Biden, a 2008
Democratic presidential candidate.
Along with Biden, officials said Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, chairman of
the Senate Armed Services Committee, and a small group of key Democrats were
involved in the effort to draft legislation. Leadership aides are also playing a
role.
It was not clear whether the measure would explicitly state that the 2002
authorization for the use of military force was being revoked. One proposal that
had been circulated would declare that Bush was not authorized to involve
U.S. armed forces in an Iraqi civil war, but it appeared that prohibition had
been dropped as part of the discussions.
One Democrat said the legislation could remain silent on the issue of Bush’s
troop increase and noted that Reid had said he was ready to move beyond the
deployment of more troops.
At the same time, several officials noted that any explicit authority for
U.S. troops to confront al-Qaida would effectively bless Bush’s decision to
dispatch about 3,500 troops to the volatile Anbar Province in the western part
of Iraq.
The balance of the 21,500 additional troops would go to Baghdad, where the
administration hopes they can help quell sectarian violence and give the Iraqi
government time to establish its authority.