Senate moves toward a clash with Bush

Nonbinding resolution against troop boost is introduced, called message to president

Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau

January 18 2007

A bipartisan group of senators took the first step Wednesday in what is fast shaping up as a constitutional confrontation with President Bush, introducing a nonbinding resolution against the president's plan to send 21,500 more American troops to Baghdad.

The resolution proposed by Delaware Sen. Joseph Biden, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, both Democrats, and Sen. Chuck Hagel, a Nebraska Republican and potential presidential candidate, is likely to win wide support from Democrats.

It also could draw a significant number of Republicans who are vital to Bush's ability to maintain his command of the war. The president has said he will forge ahead regardless of what Congress does.

Faced with a fracturing caucus, Republican leaders backed off earlier threats of a filibuster. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said he would allow "people of different views a fair process for several difficult votes on the issue of Iraq."

The senators described their resolution -- the first bipartisan challenge to Bush's conduct of the war since the November election that swept Democrats into power in both houses of Congress -- as an attempt to rein in a dangerously wayward president who is defying a consensus of expert and public opinion.

"We have before us -- we, as citizens in this country -- one of the most challenging issues that has ever faced our country, certainly in modern times," Hagel said. "There is no one here in the Congress, no one that I'm aware of in this country, that wants to see this country humiliated, defeated or in any way lose its purpose."

"This is a big issue. It involves all of us. The Congress of the United States has a role to play. I don't believe we have played that role very effectively the last four years. But the Congress of the United States, as Article I of the Constitution (states), we are a co-equal branch of government," Hagel, a Vietnam veteran, said.

The resolution is expected to be the first step offered by Democrats as they seek to stop the president from sending more troops. The senators, in their proposal, shied away from capping troop levels or cutting off funding, far more controversial steps suggested in recent days by individual members of Congress.

"The first and most important, immediate step is to get something done, that we can get done quickly," Biden said. "That is, send a message to the president, which I respectfully suggest will generate from the public at large overwhelming support for what we're attempting to do."

White House spokesman Tony Snow said Bush will proceed in defiance of congressional action. "The president has obligations as commander in chief, and he will go ahead and execute them," Snow said.

Bush said in a television interview Sunday that he would resist congressional interference. "That would mean that they're not willing to support a plan that I believe will work and solve the situation," Bush said. "Listen, we've got people criticizing this plan before it's had a chance to work. And I, therefore, think they have an extra responsibility to show us a plan that will work."

The measure is scheduled to be taken up by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday, the day after Bush's State of the Union address. Other senators are preparing different resolutions -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., announced a proposal that would cap troop numbers at current levels and withdraw funding for Iraqi forces if the Iraqi government fails to deliver on its promises to Bush.

Troops already have been given orders to deploy, Biden said. But the Bush plan to secure Baghdad will proceed in stages, giving Congress time to react -- and to watch to see if it is working. Administration officials already have begun to back off statements made last week that evidence of whether the Iraqi government is holding up its end of the bargain -- such as sending in more Iraqi forces and proceeding with measures toward national reconciliation -- would be apparent within two or three months. Officials have begun hedging that timeline toward fall.

Bush supporters urged colleagues to wait to hear from Gen. David Petraeus, the architect of the Army's new counterinsurgency strategy who will lead the new effort in Iraq, before they cast judgment. Petraeus is expected to testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee next week.

"Wait until you hear from Gen. Petraeus before you write a resolution," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. He accused colleagues of trying to say they support U.S. troops while simultaneously sending a message that they cannot win, which undermines the U.S. effort.

The White House called a group of Republicans to a Roosevelt Room briefing with national security adviser Stephen Hadley to shore up weakening GOP support in Congress. Before leaving for the meeting, veteran Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana issued a stern public warning to the administration that it must open a dialogue with Syria and Iran and that the nation must begin to prepare for "what comes next" if a troop increase fails to calm Baghdad.

Even Bush loyalists acknowledged the president's war policy is at a turning point.

"It seems beyond debate that there's not going to be a chance beyond this possible final chance," said Sen. David Vitter, R-La.

Three leading foreign policy experts, including former Bush State Department official Richard Haas, painted a bleak picture of remaining U.S. options in Iraq should the new Bush plan fail.

They outlined Wednesday for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee a long, arduous containment strategy to try to prevent the civil war between Shiites and Sunnis from spilling over to the region, one that could take years of U.S. military effort from the sidelines until the two sides exhaust each other.

Haas predicted that Iraq "at best will remain divided and messy for years, and the most the United States can achieve is to keep open the possibility of normalcy until such a time most Shi'as and Sunnis in Iraq are willing to embrace such a notion and take steps to bring it about."

Vali Nasr, a national security expert at the Naval Postgraduate School and author of "The Shia Revival," a book now making the rounds of Washington policymaking circles, said that any U.S. effort to take on the Shiite militias that back the weak Iraqi government could intensify the war.

Anti-war measures also began to proliferate in the House. Democratic Reps. Lynn Woolsey of Petaluma and Barbara Lee of Oakland -- co-chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus -- introduced a bill with 14 co-sponsors that would demand the withdrawal of all U.S. troops and military contractors from Iraq within six months.

Their bill also would prohibit funding for any more troops, ban permanent U.S. bases in Iraq and rescind the 2002 congressional authorization for Bush to use force in Iraq.

Woolsey said the Senate resolution is "a first step. But while we're doing that, our troops are dying. We need to go beyond talking.'' Lee and Woolsey said they have not yet spoken with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi or House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., about whether their proposal would get a committee hearing, much less a floor vote. But they said they plan to seek public support to pressure their own party's leaders to take up their plan.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate resolution
Sens. Joseph Biden, D-Del., Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., introduced a nonbinding resolution that opposes President Bush's plan to increase troop levels in Iraq. The resolution's main clauses state:

-- "It is not in the national interest of the United States to deepen its military involvement in Iraq, particularly by escalating the United States military force presence in Iraq."

-- "Iraqi political leaders (should) make the political compromises necessary to end the violence in Iraq."

-- "Greater concerted regional and international support" is needed."

"United States forces in Iraq should transition to helping ensure the territorial integrity of Iraq."

-- "The United States should transfer under an appropriately expedited timeline responsibility for internal security and halting sectarian violence in Iraq to the government of Iraq."

-- "The United States should engage nations in the Middle East to develop a regional, internationally sponsored peace and reconciliation process for Iraq."

Source: U.S. Senate

Chronicle Washington Bureau writer Edward Epstein contributed to this report. E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com