It has widely been bandied about that the Iraq War benchmark report, which will be delivered to Congress in mid-September, will come from an assortment of sources, not just the top commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus. It will be authored, as Congress dictates, by the White House and will likely include the assessments of Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, Ambassador Ryan Crocker, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and many others.
Additionally the White House has fought off suggestions that it will not allow General Petraeus to answer questions from Congress in open hearings. According to the Congressional Quarterly, Petraeus's "testimony will be his word coming out of his mouth. Nobody is going to be telling him what to say or how to say it,” according to a senior official.
The key issue will be how much weight Congress will place on the benchmark report versus the weight placed on the sworn testimony of key military staff. In other words, does Congress trust what is published from the White House or what they hear from the field commander in Iraq? This situation places General Petraeus in a lose/lose situation. If he reports things are going well, he is likely to be seen as a Bush toadie. If he reports that things are going poorly, it may be spun that he is an ineffectual leader.
At the end of the day, Congress will have to decide if it has sufficient votes to press for an end to the war or to continue in a divided fashion to stay the course. At stake is the sense of the American people that Congress is acting with due dilligence on the information they have, as opposed to seemingly uphold each party's line.
No comments:
Post a Comment