Opening
Statement of U.S. Senator Russ Feingold
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Hearing on Iraq with General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker
April 8, 2008
Thank you very
much, Mr. Chairman. And thank you both for coming again to testify here
today.
I’d also
like to thank you both for your long and distinguished service to this
country. While we may not see eye to eye on the current situation in
Iraq or the way forward, I have great respect for the difficult work
you’re undertaking – the outcome of which will be with us
for many, many years.
I hope you won’t
take it personally when I say that I wish we were also hearing today
from those who could help us look at Iraq from a broader perspective.
The participation at this hearing of those charged with regional and
global responsibilities would have given us the chance to discuss how
the war in Iraq is undermining our national security. It might have
helped us answer the most important question we face – not “are
we winning or losing in Iraq?” but “are we winning or losing
in the global fight against al Qaeda?”
Like many Americans,
I am gravely concerned by how bogged down we are in Iraq. Our huge,
open-ended military presence there is not only undermining our ability
to respond to the global threat posed by al Qaeda, but it is also creating
greater regional instability, serving as a disincentive for Iraqis to
reach political reconciliation, straining our military, and piling up
debt for future generations to repay.
I am pleased that
violence in parts of the country has declined, but as the increase in
violence in Mosul and recent events in Basra and now Baghdad indicate,
long-term prospects for reconciliation appear to be just as shaky as
they were before the surge. In fact, the drop in violence could have
serious costs, as it is partly attributable to the deals we have struck
with local militias, all of which could make national reconciliation
that much more difficult.
We need to redeploy
our troops from Iraq and I am disappointed that you are calling for
a halt in troop reductions, General Petraeus, because the presence of
about 140,000 troops in Iraq will exacerbate the conflict, not stabilize
it, and it will certainly not contribute to our overall national security.
Some have suggested that we should stay in Iraq until reconciliation
occurs. They have it backwards -- our departure is likely to force factions
to the negotiating table in an attempt to finally create a viable power-sharing
agreement.
If we redeploy,
Iraq will no longer be the “‘cause celebre’ for jihadists,
breeding a deep resentment of US involvement in the Muslim world,”
as the Intelligence Community so clearly stated. Iran, as well as Turkey,
Syria, and other regional actors, will have to decide if Iraqi instability
is really in their interests once we are no longer on the hook. Finally,
and perhaps most importantly, we will be able to adequately address
what must be our top priority – the threat posed by al Qaeda around
the globe, and particularly its safe haven in the Afghanistan-Pakistan
region. Nothing could be clearer than the need to refocus all our instruments
of national power to combat this threat.
Redeployment does
not mean abandoning Iraq. We must work for a peaceful outcome in that
country. But if we continue to leave our military caught up in the sectarian
divisions that consume Iraq, we will be doing so at grave risk to Iraq’s
progress, the region’s stability, and our own national security.
|
