Tom Harkin's Statement Supporting Reed-Levin Amendment

Statement by Senator Tom HarkinOn the Levin-Reed Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act

July 16, 2007

Mr. President, it is time to chart a new course in Iraq, and to redirect our armed forces toward a more focused and effective campaign against the terrorists who threaten us. I am cosponsoring the Levin-Reed amendment because it offers the best prospect for accomplishing these goals.

For four long years, President Bush has said that as the Iraqis step up to their responsibilities, the United States will be able to step down. Today, it is painfully clear that the opposite is the case: The Iraqi military and government will only step up to their responsibilities once it is clear that the United States is stepping down.

Levin-Reed says that the U.S. will begin troop redeployment within 120 days and remove most American combat forces from Iraq by April of next year. This acknowledges what has long been obvious to our commanders: That there can be no military solution to the mess in Iraq. At the same time, by signaling our intention to redeploy by next spring, we will create powerful incentives to force compromise within the deadlocked Iraqi government, and to compel Iraq's neighbors to play a more active, constructive role in pacifying that country.

There is no guarantee that this approach will succeed. There is no guarantee that the Iraqis will be willing or able to compromise and come together in a genuine government of national reconciliation. The only certainty is that our current course is a formula for more failure, more deadlock within the Iraqi government, more death and destruction, both Iraqi and American.

Mr. President, new developments last week have driven home the urgency of the change of course proposed by this amendment.

Last week, we learned that we are now spending an astronomical $10 billion a month in Iraq. And, this morning, the administration issued the required progress report on benchmarks for Iraq. As expected the report shows that the government in Baghdad has failed to meet any of the benchmarks for political and economic reform. The Iraqis have failed to make progress in passing a law governing the sharing of oil revenues. They have failed to make progress in allowing former Baath party members to return to their jobs. They have failed to make progress in disarming militias. They have failed to make progress in organizing new provincial elections. Indeed, the only thing the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds in parliament can agree on is that will go on vacation for the month of August.

The one glimmer of good news in the report is that the U.S. military has had some success since January in improving the security situation, though overall levels of violence and mayhem are largely unchanged. This limited success should not come as a surprise to anyone. We all appreciate the professionalism, capability, and courage of our armed forces. And it would be astonishing if we deployed an additional 30,000 troops and didn't see at least some improvement in the security situation. Unfortunately, these modest gains are all being accomplished by U.S. troops, not Iraqi troops. And because the surge is not sustainable much beyond the end of the year, even these modest gains are ephemeral.

Meanwhile, a new report by the National Counterterrorism Center concludes that al-Qaeda has grown stronger than at any time since the 9/11 attacks, and is better positioned to strike the West. In other words, while the United States' military and intelligence assets have been massively sidetracked in Iraq over the last four years, al-Qaeda has been able to regroup elsewhere, mostly in Pakistan. As the CIA's deputy director for intelligence told a House committee on Wednesday: "We see more [al-Qaeda] training. We see more money. We see more communication."

Indeed, the U.S. invasion of Iraq has been the gift that keeps of giving to al-Qaeda. There was no al-Qaeda presence in Iraq before the invasion. Now, a homegrown organization loosely affiliated with al-Qaeda — al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia — has emerged.

What's more, as previous intelligence reports have concluded, America's ongoing occupation of Iraq has been a powerful recruitment tool not only for al-Qaeda but for many new Islamic extremist organizations, some of them sprouting up spontaneously in western countries including Britain and Spain.

So, Mr. President, we have reached an extraordinary juncture with regard to the current failed policy in Iraq. We have reached the point, frankly, where you either side with the President and his demand that we stay the course in pursuit of what he calls "victory," or you side with the American people and our military commanders, who have concluded that there is no military solution to the mess in Iraq.

You either support this endless, pointless war, or you support a smarter, more focused campaign against the terrorists who truly threaten us.

Those are the choices in the current Senate debate. The Democrats and the American people have made their choice — to chart a new direction. I am confident that, as more Republicans make that same choice in the days and weeks ahead, we will ultimately prevail.

The conflict in Iraq can only be solved through political compromise and reconciliation in Baghdad, and through aggressive diplomatic engagement with Iraq's neighbors and across the Middle East.

It is time to chart a new course. The approach embodied in the Levin-Reed amendment offers us our best hope for extricating ourselves from the quagmire in Iraq, and retaking the offensive against al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups. I urge my colleagues to support the Levin-Reed amendment.