Study would examine Iraq troop withdrawals

A little-noticed earmark tucked into the 2009 defense-spending bill by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) would fund a $2.4 million independent study on withdrawing troops from Iraq.

The study could bolster arguments by Democrats and their presidential candidate, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), that the United States should withdraw troops from Iraq and send more soldiers to Afghanistan.
Obama’s rival, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), has opposed any drastic troop reductions in Iraq. If McCain wins the presidency, the study could give Senate Democrats leverage in their effort to force a troop withdrawal.

{mosads}The provision includes no “justification” language describing exactly what the study would entail. The RAND Corporation is assigned to conduct the study, which is expected to be completed within four months to coincide with the inauguration of a new president.

Kennedy and Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), both fierce opponents of the Iraq war, suggest the study would determine the impact of withdrawing troops from Iraq.

“Sen. Kennedy believes that the best way to protect our troops and our national security is to set a realistic timetable that encourages Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future,” Kennedy spokesman Anthony Coley told The Hill in an e-mail statement. “He believes strongly that it’s past time for us to change course, and this analysis will provide an objective and independent perspective on how best to do that.”

Kennedy, who has only visited the Senate once since undergoing treatment for a brain tumor, gave critical early support to Obama’s campaign. The endorsement by the patriarch of the Kennedy family bolstered Obama during his battle against Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), when it was unclear whether powerful Democrats would support him.

To win the earmark for a “phased redeployment study,” Kennedy’s office worked with Byrd and Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), the head of the Appropriations Defense panel.

In a floor speech on Sept. 27, the day the Senate passed the defense bill and a continuing resolution, Byrd said the study would assume the U.S. would only leave a small number of troops behind in Iraq to “train Iraqis, target al Qaeda and protect our mission after the withdrawal of the majority of our forces.”

Byrd stressed in his remarks that a study of this scope “is long overdue” and that now is the time to withdraw troops from Iraq. “This new RAND study will publicly and independently help chart the responsible course ahead,” the veteran senator said.

RAND is a federally and state-funded research and development center and is often considered an independent research arm of the Pentagon. The organization is an independent and nonprofit think tank with principal locations in Santa Monica, Calif.; Arlington, Va.; and Pittsburgh.

{mospagebreak}The outcome of the study would not be binding, but could serve as ammunition for Democrats who have been trying, unsuccessfully, to pass legislation that would force the current administration to redeploy the military from Iraq.

It also could put pressure on the Pentagon to accelerate its plans on withdrawing troops. Lawmakers have doubts about the status of Pentagon’s formal planning with regards to taking troops out of Iraq.

{mosads}McCain has warned that pulling troops from Iraq too quickly could set back security gains made since the “surge” of troops in 2007. He argues Obama would pull U.S. troops out of Iraq at a time when victory for the U.S. is within reach.

Since winning majorities in 2006, Democrats in the House and Senate have been unable to move legislation on a troop withdrawal, and the $612 billion defense-spending bill does not call for troops to be removed.

Fights over Iraq dominated the Congress in 2007, but Democrats this year backed away from an election-season showdown over Iraq with President Bush.

In testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee on Sept. 23, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that the United States has entered “the endgame” in Iraq. But Gates has opposed any congressional efforts to set a timetable for withdrawing troops, or requiring troop reduction.

Gates also told the panel that the greatest threat to the United States comes from tribal lands in Pakistan along the border with Afghanistan, not Iraq. But he cautioned that withdrawing more troops from Iraq, where violence has declined by 80 percent since the surge, has to be done carefully.

Bush in early September said that he would not withdraw a significant number of troops from Iraq after Gen. David Petraeus, the former top U.S. commander in Iraq and now the head of Central Command, advised him against it. Bush announced a withdrawal of 8,000 troops by February. Additionally, about 30,000 combat troops that were part of the so-called surge strategy in Iraq in 2007 have returned home.

Petraeus argued that the security gains achieved with the extra troops could be at risk in the event of another significant withdrawal.

There are currently about 146,000 U.S. troops in Iraq.